![2010 Accident Causation Factors ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (16)
Similar a Residential safety 1 26 11
Similar a Residential safety 1 26 11 (20)
Más de vtsiri
Más de vtsiri (20)
Residential safety 1 26 11
- 1. Residential Safety Part 1 – The Directive Change Part 2 – Residential Construction Hazards Draft 1 26 2011
- 9. Sloped Roofs Slide guards with guardrails for sheathing No Fall Protection
- 20. Part 2 Overview Scissor lift put on a trailer. Step ladder used to get to the roof. What do you see?
- 24. Floor Opening Abatement Violation: 4' x 8' sheets of plywood covering a stairway opening to the basement of a house. Only four nails hold the two covers. The cover is not marked. No Violation: Guardrails used
Notas del editor
- https://www.osha.gov/doc/fall_protection_factsheet.html has the factsheets
- From OSHA fact sheets…According to data from the department's Bureau of Labor Statistics, an average of 40 workers are killed each year as a result of falls from residential roofs. One-third of those deaths represent Latino workers, who often lack sufficient access to safety information and protections. Latino workers comprise more than one-third of all construction employees. From OSHA Fact Sheet Falls continue to be the leading cause of fatalities in residential construction. OSHA has concluded that fall hazards pose a significant risk of death or serious injury for construction workers and that compliance with the requirements of Subpart M is reasonably necessary to protect workers from those hazards. STD 03-00-001 addressed only certain, specified types of residential construction work. Withdrawing that directive will result in consistent enforcement policy with respect to all residential construction activities. Several state plan OSHA programs did not adopt, or have already rescinded, the enforcement policy described in STD 03-00- 001. Therefore, rescinding the compliance directive will promote consistency among all states regarding the enforcement of fall protection requirements for residential construction. OSHA expects that further advances in the design technologies of fall protection equipment will be triggered by the demands of employers who may encounter compliance difficulties on particular work sites.
- Causes of incidents: See Causes sheet. 42 falls: includes 8 falls from ladder, 4 falls from catwalk, 2 scaffolds, 2 aerial lifts 35 struck object: 14 saw blades, 13 falling objects (8 vehicle loads), 3 struck by flying object, 10 collapses: 5 aerial lifts, 2 forklifts, 2 ladders, 1 scaffold 7 burns: 4 pyrotechnics. 2 arc blasts, 1 gunpowder 6 caught in/between: 4 pyrotechnic explosions 16 other: 4 inhalation of CO, 3 hearing loss, 2 pedestrian struck by vehicle, 2 motor vehicle incidents, Activity: See Activity sheet
- From OSHA Fact Sheet Why was compliance directive STD 03-00-001 rescinded? Falls are consistently high for residential construction activities. OSHA was not persuaded that compliance with 1926.501(b)(13) is infeasible or presents significant safety hazards ACCSH, OSHSPA, and the NAHB showing that conventional fall protection is available and can be used safely for almost all residential construction operations Statistics show that fatalities from falls are consistently high for residential construction activities. OSHA considered the comments received in response to the 1999 ANPR and was not persuaded that compliance with 1926.501(b)(13) is infeasible or presents significant safety hazards for most residential construction employers. The recommendations from ACCSH, OSHSPA, and the NAHB, as well as the mounting evidence that has been presented to the ACCSH Residential Fall Protection Work Group showing that conventional fall protection is available and can be used safely for almost all residential construction operations, provide a separate and independent grounds for OSHA’s decision to withdraw STD 03-00-001.
- Why did OSHA issue Instruction STD 3.1 “Interim Fall Protection Compliance Guidelines for Residential Construction” in 1995? Once the final rule for Subpart M was published, representatives from the residential construction industry, including the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA), expressed ongoing concerns about complying with 1926.501(b)(13). For example, industry representatives were concerned about the feasibility of establishing proper anchor points on wood-framed structures. In response to their concerns and to give OSHA time to revisit some feasibility issues, the Agency issued Directive STD 3.1. The directive allowed employers doing specified residential construction activities to comply with the requirements of Subpart M by implementing the alternative fall protection and work procedures prescribed in the directive. The alternative procedures could be used without a prior showing of infeasibility or greater hazard and without a written fall protection plan. The Agency did not intend STD 3.1 to be a permanent policy. Why did OSHA reissue STD 3.1 as STD 3-0.1A in 1998? OSHA issued STD 3-0.1A (later redesignated as STD 03-00-001) as a plain language replacement for STD 3.1. In STD 03-00-001, the Agency made some changes to the original interim guidance to clarify the scope of the directive and the Agency’s enforcement policy with respect to fall protection requirements for the specific construction activities covered by the directive. In STD 03-00-001, OSHA indicated that it intended to reevaluate the interim policy after soliciting additional public comment. Why did OSHA issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) for Subpart M in 1999? OSHA issued an ANPR for Subpart M in 1999 in part to obtain information from the public that it could use to evaluate the effectiveness of and need for STD 03-00-001. In the ANPR, the Agency noted that there had been progress in the types and capability of commercially available fall protection equipment since 1926.501(b)(13) was promulgated in 1994. OSHA also stated in the ANPR that it intended to rescind STD 03-00-001 unless persuasive evidence was submitted showing that it is infeasible or presents significant safety hazards for most residential construction employers to comply with 1926.501(b)(13). Did OSHA rely on sources of information in addition to the comments received in response to the ANPR in evaluating whether to continue the interim enforcement policy contained in STD 03-00-001 ? Yes. A Residential Fall Protection Work Group within OSHA’s Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) has reported to ACCSH on a number of presentations they have seen from home builders and fall protection equipment manufacturers describing new ways of providing safe and effective fall protection in residential construction. ACCSH has recommended rescission of STD 03-00-001 on two separate occasions – first in 2000 and again in 2008. Also in 2008, both the Occupational Safety and Health State Plan Association (OSHSPA) and the NAHB submitted letters to OSHA advocating for withdrawal of STD 03-00-001. The NRCA has continued to oppose rescission of STD 03-00-001 with respect to roofing work, but a representative of that organization conceded at an ACCSH meeting in December 2009 that nowadays it is “very tough” to establish that conventional fall protection is infeasible or creates a greater hazard.
- From the fact sheet The new directive interprets “residential construction” as construction work that satisfies both of the following elements: The end-use of the structure being built must be as a home, i.e., a dwelling. The structure being built must be constructed using traditional wood frame construction materials and methods. The limited use of structural steel in a predominantly wood-framed home, such as a steel I-beam to help support wood framing, does not disqualify a structure from being considered residential construction. From OSHA Fact Sheet Why are only “dwellings” considered residential construction”? Limiting the scope of 1926.501(b)(13) to the construction of homes/dwellings comports with the plain meaning of the term “residential” in the text of that paragraph and is consistent with OSHA’s intent in promulgating that provision.
- Employees working six (6) feet or more above lower levels must be protected by conventional fall protection methods listed in 1926.501(b)(13) ( i.e., guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems ) or alternative fall protection measures allowed by other provisions of 29 CFR 1926.501(b) for particular types of work. An example of an alternative fall protection measure allowed under 1926.501(b) is the use of warning lines and safety monitoring systemsduring the performance of roofing work on lowsloped roofs. (4 in 12 pitch or less). (See 1926.501(b)(10)). OSHA allows the use of an effective fall restraint system in lieu of a personal fall arrest system. To be effective, a fall restraint system must be rigged to prevent a worker from reaching a fall hazard and falling over the edge. A fall restraint system may consist of a full body harness or body belt that is connected to an anchor point at the center of a roof by a lanyard of a length that will not allow a worker to physically reach the edge of the roof. When the employer can demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use required fall protection systems, a qualified person must develop a written site-specific fall protection plan in accordance with 1926.502(k) that, among other things, specifies the alternative fall protection methods that will be used to protect workers from falls.
- Residential construction employers generally must ensure that employees working six feet or more above lower levels use guardrails, safety nets, or personal fall arrest systems. A personal fall arrest system may consist of a full body harness, a deceleration device, a lanyard, and an anchor point. (See the definition of “personal fall arrest system” in 29 CFR 1926.500). Other fall protection measures may be used to the extent allowed under other provisions of 29 CFR 1926.501(b) addressing specific types of work. For example, 1926.501(b)(10) permits the use of warning lines and safety monitoring systems during the performance of roofing work on low-sloped roofs. From OSHA Fact Sheet Can monitors still be used? Under 1926.501(b)(10), safety monitoring systems can be used in conjunction with a warning line system to protect employees during the performance of roofing work on roofs of 4 in 12 pitch or less. When such a roof is 50 feet (15.25 m) or less in width, a safety monitoring system can be used alone, i.e., without a warning line system. Under 1926.501(b)(13), if the employer can demonstrate that the use of conventional fall protection would be infeasible or create a greater hazard, monitors may be used as part of an employer’s written fall protection plan under 1926.502(k). Are there requirements for safety monitoring systems? Yes. Safety monitoring systems must meet the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.502(h) including, but not limited to, requirements that the monitor: be competent to recognize fall hazards; be on the same walking working surface and within visual sighting distance of the employee being monitored; be close enough to communicate orally with the employee; and not have other responsibilities which could take the monitor’s attention from the monitoring function.
- From OSHA Fact Sheet A personal fall arrest system may consist of a full body harness, a deceleration device, a lanyard, and an anchor point. (See the definition of “ personal fall arrest system” in 29 CFR 1926.500). If an employer can demonstrate that fall protection required under 1926.501(b)(13) is infeasible or presents a greater hazard it must implement a written, site-specific fall protection plan meeting the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.502(k). The fall protection plan must specify alternative measures that will be used to eliminate or reduce the possibility of employee falls.
- There is a “Sample Fall Protection Plan” in Appendix E of Subpart M. Why did OSHA prepare this appendix? OSHA included Appendix E in Subpart M to show employers and employees what a compliant fall protection plan might look like. From OSHA Fact Sheet Can a standardized fall protection plan be developed and implemented for the construction of dwellings that are of the same basic structural design? Before using a fall protection plan at a particular worksite, the employer must first be able to demonstrate that it is infeasible or presents a greater hazard to use conventional fall protection methods at that site. Fall protection plans must be site-specific to comply with §1926.502(k). A written fall protection plan developed for repetitive use, e.g., for a particular style or model of home, will be considered site-specific with respect to a particular site only if it fully addresses all issues related to fall protection at that site. Therefore, a standardized plan will have to be reviewed, and revised as necessary, on a site by site basis.
- Prior to the issuance of this new directive, STD 03- 00-001 allowed employers engaged in certain residential construction activities to use specified alternative methods of fall protection (e.g., slide guards or safety monitor systems) rather than the conventional fall protection (guardrails, safety nets, or personal fall arrest systems) required by the residential construction fall protection standard (29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13)). Employers could use the alternative measures described in STD 03-00-001 without first proving that the use of conventional fall protection was infeasible or created a greater hazard and without a written fall protection plan. From OSHA Fact Sheet Slideguards cannot simply be used in lieu of conventional fall protection methods under 1926.501(b)(13). However, slideguards may be used as part of a written, site-specific fall protection plan that meets the requirements of 1926.502(k) if the employer can demonstrate that the use of conventional fall protection (i.e., guardrail, safety net, or personal fall arrest systems) would be infeasible or create greater hazards.
- From the fact sheet If the employer can demonstrate that use of conventional fall protection methods is infeasible or creates a greater hazard, it must ensure that a qualified person: o Creates a written, site-specific fall protection plan in compliance with 29 CFR 1926.502(k); and o Documents, in that plan, the reasons why conventional fall protection systems are infeasible or why their use would
- We do not want people using a truss as an anchorage unless it has been designed for anticipated fall arrest forces.
- OSHA Installation Procedures for Roof Truss and Rafter Erection During the erection and bracing of roof trusses/rafters, conventional fall protection may present a greater hazard to workers. On this job, safety nets, guardrails and personal fall arrest systems will not provide adequate fall protection because the nets will cause the walls to collapse, while there are no suitable attachment or anchorage points for guardrails or personal fall arrest systems. On this job, requiring workers to use a ladder for the entire installation process will cause a greater hazard because the worker must stand on the ladder with his back or side to the front of the ladder. While erecting the truss or rafter the worker will need both hands to maneuver the truss and therefore cannot hold onto the ladder. In addition, ladders cannot be adequately protected from movement while trusses are being maneuvered into place. Many workers may experience additional fatigue because of the increase in overhead work with heavy materials, which can also lead to a greater hazard. Exterior scaffolds cannot be utilized on this job because the ground, after recent backfilling, cannot support the scaffolding. In most cases, the erection and dismantling of the scaffold would expose workers to a greater fall hazard than erection of the trusses/rafters. On all walls eight feet or less, workers will install interior scaffolds along the interior wall below the location where the trusses/rafters will be erected. "Sawhorse" scaffolds constructed of 46 inch sawhorses and 2x10 planks will often allow workers to be elevated high enough to allow for the erection of trusses and rafters without working on the top plate of the wall. In structures that have walls higher than eight feet and where the use of scaffolds and ladders would create a greater hazard, safe working procedures will be utilized when working on the top plate and will be monitored by the crew supervisor. During all stages of truss/rafter erection the stability of the trusses/rafters will be ensured at all times. (Your company name here) shall take the following steps to protect workers who are exposed to fall hazards while working from the top plate installing trusses/rafters: Only the following trained workers will be allowed to work on the top plate during roof truss or rafter installation: Workers shall have no other duties to perform during truss/rafter erection procedures; All trusses/rafters will be adequately braced before any worker can use the truss/rafter as a support; Workers will remain on the top plate using the previously stabilized truss/rafter as a support while other trusses/rafters are being erected; Workers will leave the area of the secured trusses only when it is necessary to secure another truss/rafter; The first two trusses/rafters will be set from ladders leaning on side walls at points where the walls can support the weight of the ladder; and A worker will climb onto the interior top plate via a ladder to secure the peaks of the first two trusses/rafters being set. The workers responsible for detaching trusses from cranes and/or securing trusses at the peaks traditionally are positioned at the peak of the trusses/rafters. There are also situations where workers securing rafters to ridge beams will be positioned on top of the ridge beam. (Your company name here) shall take the following steps to protect workers who are exposed to fall hazards while securing trusses/rafters at the peak of the trusses/ridge beam
- From OSHA fact sheet A fall restraint system may consist of a full body harness or body belt that is connected to an anchor point at the center of a roof by a lanyard of a length that will not allow a worker to physically reach the edge of the roof.
- From OSHA Fact Sheet
- A proper ladders, scaffold with stairs or aerial lift tall enough would have been safer. This is imminent danger to me!
- Accident 170836027 -- Report ID: 0950615 -- Event Date: 06/18/2010 Inspection: 125478560 Open: 06/22/2010 SIC: 1741 Omnistone Masonry Inc On 06/18/10 at 1408 Hours an employee of Omnistone Masonry, Inc, 23588 Connecticut Street, Suite 10, Hayward, CA 94545, was fatally injured. The accident was reported 06/18/10 at 1503 Hours. The injured employee was working from a scaffold work platform at a height of 18' 6" from the ground below. He fell from this unguarded work platform and sustained a fatal head injury. The employer specializes in stone/ brick masonry work. A 20,000 square foot SFR was being erected at this site. Accident- related citation issued, Serious 8CCR- 1644(a)(6) End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition $50,000 to $250,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 125478560 Rafael Aguilar Moren 23 M Fatality Concussion Brickmasons and Stonemasons FallDist: 16 FallHt: 20 Cause: Exterior masonry FatCause: Exterior masonry
- 03/02/2005 at 4:46PM Cause of Death: Fall The victim was one of a four man crew framing a two story residential building with a basement. The victim returned from lunch and the crew was on the second floor preparing to start work setting the east interior wall of the bonus room when the victim fell down the stairwell opening 19' 2" to the basement concrete floor. There were no guardrails on three sides of the 10' by 8' stairwell opening.
- Accident 200203610 - Employee Fell From A Ladder, Causing Fatal Injury Accident 200203610 -- Report ID: 0418200 -- Event Date: 10/08/2010 Inspection: 314637513 Open: 10/08/2010 SIC: 1761 Miguel Nava On 8 October 2010 at approximately 1500hrs, an employee was fatally injured while working from a Werner 25-ft extension ladder. The employee was working with six other employees who were installing roofing shingles on a private residence. At some point while carrying shingles to the roof, using the extension ladder, the employee lost his balance and fell to the ground below. Emergency response personnel were dispatched to the residence and the employee was pronounced dead on site. The employee was transported to the Fulton County Medical Examiner's Center in Atlanta, Georgia. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Alteration or rehabilitation $50,000 to $250,000 3 23 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314637513 Homero Blancas-Marti 35 M Fatality Bruise/Contus/Abras Roofers FallDist: 14 FallHt: 6 Cause: Roofing FatCause: Roofing Accident 201751997 - Roofing Employee Fell From Ladder Approx 8-9 Feet and Died Accident 201751997 -- Report ID: 0830600 -- Event Date: 09/22/2010 Inspection: 313722878 Open: 09/24/2010 SIC: 1761 Edwin Valle Construction Roofers on a residential tear-off and replace job were using a ladder to access the roof area in the front of the house. The front had an eyebrow at the porch area and did not allow for proper ladder set up. The ladder was set too flat. The feet had been removed from the ladder to allow the rails to stick in the soil. Just after early lunch break the victim started up the ladder to go back to work. He got about 8-9 feet up in the air and fell off the ladder. He suffered much bodily damage, (concussions, broken ribs, and internal). It was reported he had suffered a heart attack by the crew. The autopsy showed differently. The crew was hispanic from Guatamola and there was some confusion as to the First Aid response. The crew stated they did not call 911 because they thought the phone would ring in the place they had bought them (Florida, Louisianna, Texas. They also took the time to remove the shirt of the victim, clean him up, and put on another shirt before loading him into PU for transport. The local PD and Coroner had some concerns as to the accident and were following up with interviews of the crew. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Maintenance or repair Under $50,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 313722878 Carlos R. Benites 58 M Fatality Concussion Roofers FallDist: 14 FallHt: 9 Cause: Roofing Employee was working on the exterior of a house when he leaned a ladder on the corner of the structure. Another employee was holding the ladder. Deceased climbed up to approximately 7 ft. and the ladder slipped and could not be held. The deceased fell striking his head and neck on the ground
- On September 11, 2008, at approximately 8:45am, a 30-year-old male died because of a cardiac arrhythmia. Multiple injuries due to a fall from height were significant conditions contributing to his death. The employee, a Polish worker spoke only Polish. Polish was the primary language at the work site. The employee was performing tuckpointing from a ladder jack scaffold platform erected approximately 5.5 feet above the asphalt driveway. The work was being conducted on the south side of a one and one half story existing single family home. The employer was working with the deceased employee on the scaffold. This was the first day at the site and employees were just starting to work from the scaffold. The employer stated that he observed the employee fall forward and did not put his arms out to stop the fall. The employee fell between the wall and the scaffold striking his head on the driveway. The weather was warm and sunny. Personal fall protection is required when working from a ladder jack scaffold platform above ten feet high. The employee was not wearing personal fall protection. The employer had personal fall protection available for employee use. This was the third day the employee had worked for the company.
- Employee #1 (deceased) and EE# 2 had loaded wooden doors into the box. EE# 1 told EE#3- the Operator to lift the box up to the third floor unit and lock the lift in place. EEs# 1 and 2 then walked up to the 3rd floor unit onto the balcony, EE# 1 climbed over the balcony into the box. After passing the first door to EE# 2, EE#1 went to reach for the second door when EE#3 heard wood cracking EE#1 fell from the box 40'ft to the ground below and the box landed on top of the employee before hit the ground.
- Accident 200678159 - Electrocution Accident 200678159 -- Report ID: 0418800 -- Event Date: 09/23/2010 Inspection: 314265562 Open: 09/23/2010 SIC: 1731 Panel Electric, Inc. On September, 23 at approximately 1345 hours, a 52 year male was killed as a result of an electrocution while working on an energized electrical circuit. The victim was considered a experienced licensed electrician and Foreman by the employer. The victim was on the premises for the purpose of trimming out electrical devices such as lights, switches, and electrical outlets of a remodeled apartment. According to the information obtained from the company, the victim was electrocuted while in the process of installing an electrical receptacle outlet of the bathroom on an energized 110 Volts and 15 amperes circuit. At the time of the accident, the victim was the only employee from the company working on the premises. There were no witnesses of the accident. According to the employer, the company policy is to always shut off the power. According to the General Contractor, the victim complained of being shocked during the morning and was told to shut the power off and remove the breaker. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Alteration or rehabilitation Under $50,000 5 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314265562 Alan Gerard Bazinet 52 M Fatality Other FallDist: 09 Cause: Interior plumbing, ducting, electrical work FatCause: Interior plumbing, ducting, electrical work Accident 200074532 - Electrocution Accident 200074532 -- Report ID: 0453720 -- Event Date: 08/16/2010 Inspection: 314839622 Open: 08/18/2010 SIC: 1711 James Henderson D.B.A. James Henderson On August 16,2010, James Henderson was removing a copper pipe which provided water service to a hot water heater. As he pulled the pipe through a hole it contacted the 220 volt AC service for the hot water heater. James Henderson was electricuted. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Maintenance or repair Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314839622 James Henderson 23 M Fatality Electric Shock FallDist: 08 FatCause: Installing plumbing, lighting fixtures Accident 200041705 - Electrocution Accident 200041705 -- Report ID: 0653510 -- Event Date: 07/29/2010 Inspection: 314836255 Open: 08/24/2010 SIC: 1711 All Hours Plumbing Employee was repairing water leak under a private residence when he was electrocuted. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Maintenance or repair Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314836255 Jeremy N Lee 27 M Fatality Electric Shock Plumbers, Pipefitters and Steamfitters FallDist: 08 FatCause: Installing plumbing, lighting fixtures Accident 202126702 - Employee Was Electrocuted in Attic When Installing Ac Unit. Accident 202126702 -- Report ID: 0627500 -- Event Date: 09/28/2010 Inspection: 313498677 Open: 09/29/2010 SIC: 1711 Mechanical Technologies SUMMARY: On September 28, 2010 at approximately 4:00 pm Juan Martinez Vasquez, a 35 year old Hispanic male, air condition technician, was killed when he was in the process of installing a thermostat line from an attic. The metal fish tape that was going to be used to pull the thermostat wiring through a wall came into contact with an uninsulated portion of a 110 Volt line that was a permanent fixture in the attic. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 313498677 Juan M. Vasquez 35 M Fatality Electric Shock Heating, Air Conditioning, and Refrig. Mechanics FallDist: 09 Cause: Installing equipment (HVAC and other) FatCause: Installing equipment (HVAC and other) Accident 201925260 - Electrocution Accident 201925260 -- Report ID: 0626700 -- Event Date: 08/27/2010 Inspection: 312924624 Open: 09/30/2010 SIC: 1711 Halcumb Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Employee #1 was in the crawl space under an older home on a pier and beam foundation removing the old sheet metal A/C duct work that cut into a 240 volt electical line going into the house's electric dryer and electrocuting employee #1. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Alteration or rehabilitation Under $50,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 312924624 Robert A. Hicks Jr 31 M Fatality Electric Shock Sheetmetal Duct Installers FallDist: 10 Cause: Installing equipment (HVAC and other) FatCause: Demolition Accident 101996106 - Electrocution Accident 101996106 -- Report ID: 0950411 -- Event Date: 08/26/2010 Inspection: 314820291 Open: 08/26/2010 SIC: 1711 Allens Air Conditioning and Heat The owner and sole proprietor of air conditioning company was electrocuted working in the attic of a rental house apparently after contacting the 110-volt doorbell transformer. He was subsequently found lying facedown by the renter of the house who became suspicious when she heard the sound of a moan followed by silence. The victim was working alone, and the power to the house was not off. Paramedics arrived and administered emergency aid before transport to medical center where victim was pronounced dead. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Alteration or rehabilitation Under $50,000 1 10 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314820291 Darren Scott Allen 44 M Fatality Electric Shock Electrical and Electronic Technicians Victim and another worker were in the process of doing some siding work to a residential home. They removed an antenna from the side of the home when it came in contact with a 7200 volt power line and victim was fatally shocked. On November 19, 2008, at approximately 1:15 PM, a 29 year old male was electrocuted as a result of a 13/26 foot long aluminum ladder contacting a 7.2 kilo-volt overhead power line. The employee was an occasional employee for the past eight years for the company. He had worked for the last year for the company. The victim was working with a foreman. They were installing windows at a second level location, rear of the duplex. They were using the 13/26 foot aluminum extension ladder to access the exterior of the building. The windows lower section was 15 feet 6 inches above the ground. The foreman was near the victim, but was not looking at him. The victim was attempting to move the ladder, with the power lines directly behind him. He was standing the ladder straight up, so he could pick it up and move it to another window. The ground was scraped dirt, and it was muddy. The ground sloped away from the duplex toward the street and the power line. The foreman did not witness the accident but heard a noise, looked and saw the victim had made contact the power line. The foreman called 911 and Emergency Services were dispensed. The west wall was 12 feet 7 inches horizontally away from the power lines. There were no contributing weather variables; it was clear and mild, with no precipitation. The ladder apparently tilted past the 90 degree vertical and made contact with the power lines with the victim looking away from the lines. Interview with wife of deceased on 15 September 2005: Wife, Cheri, was helping husband (Jerry) in replacing a pressure tank. A pressure tank is like, "a personal water tower." the wife turned the power on to see if the tank was functional (water entering the tank). Jerry was reaching to shut off the valve when he brushed against the switch, and was electrocuted. The wife unplugged the power (tank). The Paramedics transported Gerald to Central DuPage Hospital. Coroner = "Death by electrocution." At 3:00pm, employee was working alone in a new residence while removing an air diverter from an installed residential heat pump inside air handler's duct work. The duct work in which the diverter was located was directly below the air handler, which had the 20 kilowatts auxiliary heating coils, 230 volts. The victim cut out the side of the duct work to gain access to the screws that held the diverter in place. The power was not turned off to the air handler. The victim put his head into the duct work, attempted to pull the diverter toward him in the limited space to access the last two screws, and raised his head into the heating element. The victim was electrocuted. On October 04, 2006 at approximately 4:00 p.m. two gutter installation employees were working from a ladder jack scaffold. The gutter that they were installing made contact with a high voltage over head power line resulting in the electrocution death of one of the employees. Accident 200556173 - Electrocution Accident 200556173 -- Report ID: 0625700 -- Event Date: 09/03/2010 Inspection: 314766734 Open: 09/04/2010 SIC: 1731 Embry Shaw Dba 220 Electric The employer had been contracted to and was in the process of installing a backup generator. At the time of the incident two employees were in the process of testing the main cutout switch from the generator to the switch-over gear. Employee number one (1) was at the cutout and employee number two (2) was at the generator about twenty (20) feet away and within sight of employee number one (1). Communication had been established between the two employees that the cutout switch was about to be tested. When the cutout was energized by employee number one (1) employee number (2) was in contact with the lower amperage 110 volt sensing circuit/s and was electrocuted. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314766734 Dwain K Lolley 49 M Fatality Electric Shock Accident 202504007 - Electrocution Accident 202504007 -- Report ID: 0352440 -- Event Date: 07/20/2010 Inspection: 314683988 Open: 07/21/2010 SIC: 1731 Cesar Ubillus-Tapla One employee was installing and rewiring light fixtures in a two story house, which was being renovated. While working the a crawl space in the attic of the house, the employee contacted a live circuit. The employee was transported to Prince Georges Hospital Center where he was pronounced dead. Citations recommended. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Alteration or rehabilitation Under $50,000 2 20 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314683988 David Guerra 50 M Fatality Electric Shock Electricians FallDist: 08 Cause: Installing plumbing, lighting fixtures FatCause: Installing plumbing, lighting fixtures
- When assembly / disassembly could get within 20 foot of a power line either; Shut off and ground Maintain the 20’ clearance including the meeting, non-conductive taglines insulators etc plus A proximity alarm, dedicated spotter, warning device or insulating link Or verify with utility exact voltage and use a table for safe distances
- Accident 200515088 - Crushed By Accident 200515088 -- Report ID: 0552700 -- Event Date: 06/28/2010 Inspection: 314625153 Open: 06/29/2010 SIC: 1522 Abbco Construction Company A person who the general contractor stated was not an employee decided to use a roller compactor while the owner of the equipment was off site. While operating it the compactor tipped over crushing the person. When the equipment owner came back on site he talked with two employees who were leaving work. The employees turned to leave and owner proceeded on site and discovered the compactor turned over. He called the two employees back and had them help him remove the compactor from the victim. No employer employee relationship could be determined between the victim and the equipment owner. Therefore no MNOSHA jurisdiction. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling New project or new addition $250,000 to $500,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314625153 Phillip Soukup 35 M Fatality Bruise/Contus/Abras FallDist: 05 FatCause: Backfilling and compacting Employees were installing approximately 70 foot long trusses without proper temporary bracing when the trusses fell along with employees working from trusses. An employee was installing a mobile home on a lot. During the installation the employees used 12 ton hydraulic jacks to support the home before they put the masonry blocks under the home before final installation.The victim Roger Dunithan was in the process of removing the final 12 ton hydraulic jack, during the removal he used a tool to take weight of the jack to lower the home. During this procedure the home shifted 3 feet and crushed him. The victim sustained a crushed chest and pelvis and died. On November 9, 2005 at approximately 8:45 a.m. an employee was fatally crushed when an overhead garage door frame weighing approximately 800 pounds with a 600 pound, 17 foot 10 inch steel I-beam encased in approximately 200 pounds of lumber tipped over on him. The victim was operating and using the LULL 944E-42 rough terrain forklift to hoist the overhead garage door frame when he backed up the forklift and retracted the boom of the forklift. The victim exited the cab of the forklift and began walking towards the overhead garage door frame that was only secured by one nut and bolt on the sill plate. The top heavy overhead garage door frame tipped over outwards from the garage and struck the victim in the back of the head as he was walking over stacked lumber and he was reacting to the falling frame by covering his head with his hands and ducking down at the same time. An employee was digging under an extension of the poured footing inside of an excavation when it gave way; fatally crushig him. Employee was crushed between framed wall and floor while attempting to stand the wall up during framing of house. On Thursday, March 30, 2006 at approximately 6:00 PM, employee #1 was cleaning out the pumping system and pipelines of a concrete pumping rig. A column of highly compressed air had become lodged inside the line behind an obstruction. The air pressure eventually forced the obstruction out and produced a violent percussive blast within the immediate vicinity of employee #1. On December 2, 2004 at approximately 3:43 p.m., an employee was in the process of using a Bobcat to place pea gravel in a crawlspace of a new single-family home when he noticed a hydraulic hose line had ruptured. The victim was working under the raised bucket full of pea gravel on the Bobcat trying to repair the ruptured hydraulic hose line. The victim was in the process of loosening another hydraulic hose line with a wrench to move it out of the way to repair the ruptured hose line. When the victim loosened the hydraulic hose line in the front, the bucket full of pea gravel slowly fell on the victim crushing him between the cab and the bucket of the Bobcat. The victim was taken to the hospital where he was pronounced dead. Employee was standing on the south side of a trailer during unloading activities. A 12 inch 700 lbs pipe fell off a front-end loader back onto the stack of pipe then rolled off and struck the employee in his chest causing him to fall to the ground. The pipe then rolled across his chest and head. Accident 200881753 - Struck By Earth Roller. Accident 200881753 -- Report ID: 0215800 -- Event Date: 10/23/2010 Inspection: 314347774 Open: 10/23/2010 SIC: 1542 Tkh Northeast, Inc Employee was a operating a vibratory roller compacting backfill and the rear wheels of the roller went over the side of an embackment tipping the roller and striking a tree. The employee was pinned between the roller overhead ropes structure and the ground. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Tower, tank, storage elevator New project or new addition $250,000 to $500,000 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314347774 James J. Mihok 46 M Fatality Asphyxia Paving, Surfacing and Tamping Equipment Operators FallDist: 05 Cause: Backfilling and compacting FatCause: Backfilling and compacting Accident 201925047 - Struck By Bed of Dump Trailer Accident 201925047 -- Report ID: 0626700 -- Event Date: 01/05/2010 Inspection: 312920549 Open: 01/08/2010 SIC: 1795 Bully Bros Llc On 01/05/10 Employee # 1 was attempting to lower the bed of a detached dump trailer which had become stuck in the upright position. The employee was working in between the trailer bed and frame when the bed fell crushing the employee. Employee # 2 who assisted employee # 1 but was standing outside the caught between area was also struck by the falling trailer bed but sustained only minor injuries. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Demolition Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 312920549 Martin Sandoval 34 M Fatality Fracture FallDist: 06 Cause: Demolition FatCause: Demolition
- A landscaper fell off the back of a trailer behind a dump truck and was crushed by the wheels on the trailer.
- Accident 201752003 - Employee Rolled Back-Hoe Accident 201752003 -- Report ID: 0830600 -- Event Date: 10/14/2010 Inspection: 315016543 Open: 10/15/2010 SIC: 1794 Webco, Inc. Employee appeared to misjudged locations of back-hoe. Back-hoe traversed down steep hill, approx 435 feet. At the bottom of hill back-hoe turned over throwing employee out of the drivers compartment. The back-hoe landed on employee, crushing him. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 2 19 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 315016543 Joshua Brown 34 M Fatality Other Miscellaneous Material Moving Equipment Operators Accident 200263986 - Struck By Accident 200263986 -- Report ID: 0627100 -- Event Date: 07/30/2010 Inspection: 314528415 Open: 07/30/2010 SIC: 1522 Nagera Construction The victim was operating a Genie extensible boom rough terrain forklift to set prefabricated trusses for a two story apartment complex. The victim, who was not wearing a seat belt, transited horizontally across a slope that was approximately 35 degrees from horizontal, with the boom extended approximately 42 feet and elevated approximately 30 degrees. The corner of the truss the victim was transporting struck the hill side. The victim simultaneously attempted to raise the boom and turned the forklift up the slope. The forklift overturned pinning the victim beneath the roll over protective structure where he received fatal injuries. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling New project or new addition $1,000,000 to $5,000,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314528415 Juan Coronado 21 M Fatality Other FallDist: 05 FatCause: Exterior carpentry Two employees were working in a forklift basket installing windows on a single family residential home. After the installing the windows, the rough terrain forklift was backed up, without lowering the boom. The forklift was on a slope and the ground had ruts. As a result, the entire forklift tipped over on its side. Employees were working from an elevated work platform on a rough terrain fork lift with a 20 ft. long manufactured pick supported by platform on one end and a ladder jack bracket on the other. Employee was working from pick one from platform when the platform disengaged from the carriage and fell to the ground. One employee received fatal head injuries. On 09/12/07 at approx. 12:45 pm employee #1 went onto a scaffold platform that was supported by a rough terrain forklift to a caulk a window preparing it to install 10 feet 3 inches above the ground below. Employee was not tied off to the platform. The platform was not secured to the forks of the forklift and when employee stepped onto the platform on one side it tipped and turned over coming off the forks and dumped employee onto the ground with the scaffold platform landing on top of him, killing employee instantly.
- Accident 200785137 - Employee Was Struck By the Bucket of A Skidsteer. Accident 200785137 -- Report ID: 0626300 -- Event Date: 11/18/2010 Inspection: 314179938 Open: 11/19/2010 SIC: 1771 Sebastian Soto Concrete An employee of Sebastian Soto Concrete was fatally injured when he was struck-by the bucket of a skid-steer loader. The employee had the bucket of the loader elevated, and reached out from the seat of the loader to retrieve a tool. When the employee reach for the tool the bucket came down and struck the employee's head and neck. The employee was trapped between the bucket and the loader frame. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling New project or new addition $5,000,000 to $20,000,000 2 30 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314179938 Elder Gomez 20 M Fatality Other Excavating and Loading Machine Operators FallDist: 05 Cause: Pouring concrete foundations and walls FatCause: Site grading and rock removal Accident 312436934 - Head Injury From Backhoe (Fatality) Accident 312436934 -- Report ID: 0950643 -- Event Date: 06/07/2010 Inspection: 312436934 Open: 06/08/2010 SIC: 1794 Bob Goodman Landscapes On June 7, 2010, at approximately 1400 hours, the Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District reported an accident of a laborer (Martin Torres-Garcia), fifty-two (52) years of age who sustained a head injury and fracture of C1 and C2, as a result of being struck in the head by the bucket of a Volvo Backhoe, Model EC 140 LC, Product ID #EC140LCCO3070X. The employee was employed by Bob Goodman Landscapes, a grading, excavating and stone work company which employed 1 employee. The employee had been working for the owner off and on since September 2009. The employer does not have a business license or worker's compensation and paid his employee cash. The Division conducted the inspection on June 8, 2010 at 1110 hours. At the time of the incident, the victim was engaged in making sure the backhoe operator, owner of company, did not hit any underground pipes and was also doing some hand shoveling while excavating for a foundation on an addition to a home. The backhoe operator had picked up a large rock in the bucket and was moving it to his rock pile which was located approximately 30 feet away from the excavation. His employee at the time was standing on the opposite side of the excavation making sure he didn't hit a PVC pipe. As the backhoe operator was swinging the bucket back to the excavation he hit his employee who had moved approximately 18 feet next to the spoils pile and was bending over to pick up some smaller rocks. The employee was hit in the head right above his forehead with the large bucket which knocked the employee over. Due to the position of the bucket arm, the operator was unable to see out of the right window and did not know his employee had changed location on the jobsite. The employee was not wearing a hard hat or safety vest. The backhoe operator immediately turned off the backhoe and called 911. The homeowner, Robert Ornstein, who is the general contractor on the project and his employee, Thomas Crabtree were on site but did not witness the accident. Carpinteria- Summerland Fire Protection District responded to the accident site and the victim, who was not breathing, was taken to Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara. At the time of the inspection, June 8, 2010, the victim was in a coma at Cottage Hospital and died on June 15, 2010. Coroner's report has been requested from the Santa Barbara Coroner's Office. The Division issued a Serious Accident Related citation for 1592(a) due to the vehicle operator not ensuring the presence of his worker in the area of operations before moving the backhoe bucket. Several General citations were also issued. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition $250,000 to $500,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 312436934 Martin Torres-Garcia 52 M Fatality Concussion Construction Laborers FallDist: 26 Cause: Site grading and rock removal FatCause: Excavation
- Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: 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 and fall hazards: Employees were installing approximately twenty-six, 80 foot span wooden trusses, without sufficient bracing to prevent collapse of the trusses. Feasible methods of abatement include, but are not limited to: Installing wood trusses and temporary bracing of the wood trusses in accordance with all of the following: 1. The Wood Truss Council of America and Truss Plate Institute guidelines contained in the Building Component Safety Information (BCSI) Guide 1-03 entitled, "Guide to Good Practice for Handling, Installing & Bracing of Metal Connected Wood Trussed" A2. The BCSI-B1 Summary Sheet entitled, "Guide for Handling, Installing, and Bracing Metal Plate Connected Wood Trusses" AND BY 3. Consulting with a Registered Professional Engineer for the temporary bracing of wood trusses longer than sixty feet in length. On November 24, 2008 at approximately 1:30 pm two of seven employees working to install a truss system were injured when the trusses collasped. Four of the workers were outside the building at the time of the collapse. One employee was on the exterior top-plate on the north side of the building and was not injured. A male, English speaking employee of Romano Company, Inc. (SIC: 1542; NAICS: 236220), age 50, fell approximately 15-feet onto concrete. The employee sustained multiple broken bones and head trauma. The employee was pronounced dead at 5:29 pm at St. Mary's Hospital, Decatur, Illinois. A male, English speaking employee of the framing contractor was injured by this event when the employee's foot was broken when the worker fell with the trusses. The seven employees worked to set 80-foot trusses, installing a new roof system on an existing building. The Romano employee worked on the exterior top-plate on the south side of the structure. The framing contractor employee worked in the truss webbing. The truss system was supported by a steel column and beam system that was erected inside the building walls. The crew consisted of employees from two companies. Four workers were in the trusses; one on each top-plate and two in the web. At approximately 1:30 pm the 73 trusses that had been set by the team collasped and fell to the building floor. The event occurred outdoors, the temperatures were (in degrees fahrenheit): high 47, low 35, average 41. The average wind-speed was 13.2 mph with maximum recorded wind speed of 25 mph. There was 0.03 inches of precipitation. The weather station that collected this data is located approximately 5.6 miles from the construction site From the Romano Fatal in 2008 On or about November 24, 2008, employees were exposed to the hazard of being struck and crushed by metal plate connect wood trusses that were not restrained or braced in accordance with manufacturer specifications. Feasible means of abatement could have been achieved by following the truss manufacturer guidance incorporated in the document received by the employer with the truss shipment and prepared by the Truss Plate Institute and the Wood Truss Council of America. This document was entitled, BCSI-B2, Truss Installation & Temporary Restraint/Bracing, and it recommended the following for long span trusses: 1)Install top chord lateral restraints every 4-feet on-center (maximum), overlapping each 2x4 restraint by 2-trusses. 2)Install top chord diagonal bracing at each end and every 20-feet (maximum) with each brace spanning 4-trusses (maximum). 3)Install bottom chord lateral restraints every 10 to 15-feet, overlapping each 2x4 restraint by 2-trusses. 4)Install bottom chord diagonal bracing at each end and every 20-feet (maximum), at approximately 45-degree angles, and overlapping each 2x4 brace by 2-trusses. 5)Install web diagonal bracing at the same spacing as the bottom chord lateral restraints, at each end and every 20-feet (maximum), starting at or near the bottom chord and at approximately 45-degree angles. 6)Secure each temporary brace and restraint member with 2-10d, 2-12d, or 2-16d nails at each truss the brace or restraint intersects. 7)Erect temporary truss support at center of the span, to reduce bucking forces in the trusses, until all permanent bracing is installed. 8)Sheath trusses as soon as possible to ensure the integrity of the structure. 9)Ensure that all lumber used to temporarily restrain and brace the truss system is stress graded lumber. 10)Ensure that truss bracing methods used are suitable for the type and size of truss being set. 11)Consult a Professional Engineer for temporary installation of restraints and braces for truss spans over 60-feet.
- IC 22-8-1.1 Section 2: 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: Job site -----On or about January 18, 2007 the employer did not move and lift truss members on the 60 feet wooden trusses according to the guidelines contained within the Building Component Safety Information Parts 1-11 and the BCSI B1 Summary Sheet published by the Wood Truss Council of America (WTCA) and the Truss Plate Institute (TPI) which require that trusses not be dragged on uneven ground, not lifted by the peak, and prohibit altering truss members unless specifically permitted by the Truss Design Drawing or without the Truss Manufacturer's prior approval. Among other methods, one feasible and acceptable abatement method to correct this hazard is to lift the truss with a spreader bar or stiffback prior to moving or installation and not to add any component, alter, or make modifications to the truss
- Accident 202574216 - Struck By Accident 202574216 -- Report ID: 0352440 -- Event Date: 08/09/2010 Inspection: 314684275 Open: 08/09/2010 SIC: 1623 W.F. Wilson & Sons, Inc. The victim sustained fatal injury when he was struck by the swinging superstructure of a Daewoo model # SL 340 LC-V excavator, as he walked along a path that was 26 to 36 inches wide, between the left track of the excavator and a cutaway portion of a hillside, where the hillside was 36 to 39 inches high. While the victim was in this area, the excavator operator had taken a shovel load of soil out of the excavation, using the excavator. As the operator swung the shovel and superstructure to his right, the victim got struck by the swinging superstructure, knocking him against the side of the hill, and eventually causing him to strike the top of his head, and fall on the excavator track that was in contact with the ground. The excavators tracks were already stationary for approximately 45 minutes at the time of the accident. There was no barricade erected around the excavator to prevent employees from entering the swing radius area where they could be struck by the swinging superstructure, and the employer does not have a rule requiring that such a barricade be erected. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling New project or new addition $5,000,000 to $20,000,000 3 30 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314684275 Morgan Tyler Gainer 34 M Fatality Other Supervisors; Plumbers, Pipefitters & Steamfitters FallDist: 04 Cause: Trenching, installing pipe FatCause: Excavation On September 20, 2006, at approximately 8 am, a 26 year old male was killed when he walked between a Komatsu PC300LC and a gravel box. The worker was struck-by the rotating superstructure and pinned against the gravel box. The swing radius of the excavator was not barricaded so as to prevent workers from entering the swing radius. Company was in the process of installing storm sewer pipe on the site which was being readied for the construction of 218-unit town-houses.
- Concrete forms used - 3 feet x 8 feet tall x 2 inches wide Section of forms that fell onto employee was approximately 30 feet long. Name of Site: 2918 Albert Drive Jobsite Equipment: Western concrete forms Operation: A crew of employees were in the process of erecting concrete formwork for a residential foundation. Before leaving for break, the employees erecting a straight free-standing section, installed temporary bracing to prevent the forms collapsing. During the break, employee #1 arrived from another jobsite to help with the formwork erection. When employee #1 arrived at the jobsite, he immediately started working while the others remained on break. Evidence at the scene suggest that employee #1 began installing whaler/scaffold brackets on the side of the free-standing section of formwork. The whaler brackets are installed on the on the formwork in the location where the temporary bracing is installed, and the bracing is commonly removed to install the brackets. Once the Whalers are completely installed, the temporary bracing is then reinstalled, and nailed to the whaler. At the time of the accident, it appears that employee #1 had removed the braces to install the brackets, and the formwork then collapsed and struck him. There were no witnesses to the accident. Employee #1 received fatal injuries as a result of the accident. PPE: Hard hat Safety Program: The company has a written safety program and a training program for employees. The safety program is in both English and Spanish. The safety program does not contain guidelines on bracing of the formwork during the erection process. Injury: Fractures Contributing Factors: Temporary bracing was not maintained. Lack of policy and training lead to the bracing not being maintained throughout the erection process.
- Accident 200212819 - Employee Was Crushed By A Double-Wide Trailer When Jack Fail Accident 200212819 -- Report ID: 0626000 -- Event Date: 08/04/2010 Inspection: 314670316 Open: 08/05/2010 SIC: 1799 George Ruiz Dba American Mobile Home Services An employee was installing/setting up a double-wide mobile home while the employee was attempting to remove the axles form the trailer the movement caused the trailer to shift possilble knocking the jack over and crushing the employee underneath the mobile home. The victim was pronounced dead at 4:58 p.m. by the Justice of the Peace. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314670316 Angel Montero Castil 31 M Fatality Asphyxia FallDist: 03 FatCause: Other Activities-Post Decking Detail Work
- Accident 201523669 - Employee Crushed While Working in A Trench. Accident 201523669 -- Report ID: 0111500 -- Event Date: 11/01/2010 Inspection: 314821216 Open: 11/01/2010 SIC: 1741 Edwin Sousa Construction Dba On November 1, 2010 two affected employees from company C were working in and around the masonry portico from within a 7 foot 3 inch deep trench. The two employees were power washing the foundation wall to prepare it for a parge coat and subsequent waterproofing. The resulting fatality and minor injury was due to the masonry portico separating from the foundation wall and crushing the employee in the trench. The second employee was sent to the hospital for precautionary measures, and was back on site within two hours End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Alteration or rehabilitation $1,000,000 to $5,000,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314821216 Fernando Chinchillo 25 M Fatality Fracture Brickmasons and Stonemasons FallDist: 27 Cause: Waterproofing FatCause: Exterior masonry Accident 200644631 - Trench Collapse Accident 200644631 -- Report ID: 0627700 -- Event Date: 02/16/2010 Inspection: 313689838 Open: 02/16/2010 SIC: 1521 Kickapoo Housing Authority Trench collapse Victims were attempting to tie into main water line for new housing being built for the Kickapoo tribal elders: main water line was 17-20 feet underground. Reported walls of excavation were straight vertical without protective devices and without sloping/shoring. Reported initial excavation was 17 feet deep and & 8 feet x 8 feet square. Walls collapsed trapping both victims. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition $50,000 to $250,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 313689838 Keith Haddox 44 M Fatality Other FallDist: 27 Cause: Excavation FatCause: Excavation Owner of plumbing company and laborer were installing sewer line approximately 13'6" below grade. The trench was vertical with no protective system in use. When working at tie-in point, west trench wall sheared, immediately covering both. Employee in a trench between seven and eight feet was not provided a protective system when installing the sewer tap and was buried alive when the trench collapsed
- Accident 201573748 - Solder Work to Repair A Water Leak Accident 201573748 -- Report ID: 0830500 -- Event Date: 08/19/2010 Inspection: 314658899 Open: 08/20/2010 SIC: 1711 Ruppels Plumbing & Heating, Llc On June 24, 2010, the employee was using a propane torch to repair some water leaks behind a wahing machine when he ignited a fire, and was seriously burned over his arms, hands, and face. The employee was airlifted to a hospital, where he died on August 19, 2010. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Maintenance or repair Under $50,000 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314658899 Dustin Smith 26 M Fatality Burn/Scald(Heat) FallDist: 23 Cause: Interior plumbing, ducting, electrical work FatCause: Interior plumbing, ducting, electrical work Accident 202611794 - Arc Blast Accident 202611794 -- Report ID: 0352430 -- Event Date: 05/16/2010 Inspection: 314411687 Open: 05/16/2010 SIC: 1711 Fidelity Engineering Corporation At approximately 7:52a.m. on May 16, 2010 two employees were attempting to connect a Miller DC Inverter Arc Welder to an electrical panel located in a motor control center when an explosion occurred. Through employee interviews it was revealed that Employee # 1 was reading into the panel with a 1/4 inch Allen Key when the explosion occurred and sustained 3rd degree burns to 30of his body. Employee # 2 was standing directly behind employee # 1 and sustained 1st degree burns to his face, right arm, and right leg. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 3 3 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314411687 Chris Dishson 28 M Hospitalized Burn/Scald(Heat) Plumber, Pipefitter and Steamfiter Apprentices FallDist: 11 2 314411687 Eric Braun 28 M Fatality Burn/Scald(Heat) Plumber, Pipefitter and Steamfiter Apprentices Accident 201345287 -- Report ID: 0729700 -- Event Date: 03/03/2010 Inspection: 314024324 Open: 03/04/2010 SIC: 1711 M & L Services Co On or about 3/3/10, at approximately 2:50 pm, two employees (plumbers) working for M&L Services Company, were in the process of installing new furnaces and AC units at an apartment complex. The Company employees had replaced heating and air conditioning units in six apartments and they working on units in a seventh apartment. The furnace and AC units were all the same design and configuration. After lunch on the day of the accident the employees were installing some of the duct work. Employee #1 (victim) had hooked up the new thermostat, but all electrical connections were reported to be off. At approximately 2:50 p.m., employees #1 and #2 were flushing the existing copper lines of R22 refrigerant oil residue in preparation for the new 410 refrigerant. Cleaning the lines involved one person injecting a combination of "Virginia 10" solvent and nitrogen into the existing copper lines using a "Pro-Flush" injection system from the exterior of the structure and a second employee on the inside to reclaim the product at the end of the lines. The "Pro-Flush injection cylinder contained approximately 24 oz of the "Virginia 10 (Class IB flammable liquid) degreasing solvent and an unknown quantity of nitrogen. The "Pro-Flush" injection system was purchased from a vendor who was selling products to plumbing companies for use in complying with the new EPA rules for R410 refrigerant. The "Pro-Flush" device was originally purchased by the company and included a can of non-flammable solvent. The employer of M&L Services decided not to use the solvent originally purchased with the system and began to use the Virginia 10, recommended by another company selling the products for plumbers to be used for cleaning refrigerant lines being converted to R410 refrigerant. At the time of the accident employees were in the process of cleaning a 3/8 inch diameter refrigerant line. Employee #2 was outside, injecting the flammable liquid solvent into the line and employee #1 was inside the apartment reclaiming the cleaning solvent mixture utilizing a plastic coffee container. During this process, the vapors from the solvent ignited (flash fire) and employee #1 sustained 2nd and 3rd degrees burns on 80of his body. It is believed that the flash fire was a resulted from static as the liquid was discharging out of the copper line into the plastic coffee can. Employee #1 died several hours later at the Geary County Community Hospital. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling Maintenance or repair Under $50,000 1 9 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314024324 Dale Bishop 56 M Fatality Burn/Scald(Heat) FallDist: 23 Cause: Installing equipment (HVAC and other)
- Accident 202508024 - Stung By Bees Accident 202508024 -- Report ID: 0950622 -- Event Date: 12/03/2010 Inspection: 314325598 Open: 12/08/2010 SIC: 1522 Draeger Construction, Inc., At approximately 0900 hours on December 3, 2010, an employee (employee # 1) of Draeger Construction, Inc, was stung by bees while preparing to remodel a deck of a residential condominium unit. Employee # 1 was taken to Advanced Industrial Care in Concord, California by the employer where he was treated and released. On Sunday December 5, 2010, employee # 1 died. The employer filed a report telephonically with the Concord District Office at 0930 hours on December 6, 2010. Concord District Office enforcement personnel arrived at the scene of the injury on Dec 8, 2010 to open and conduct an inspection. Per the Contra Costa County Coroner's Report subsequently obtained by the Division, employee # 1 died from alcohol intoxication in his home on December 5, 2010 at approximately 0130 hours. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling Maintenance or repair $50,000 to $250,000 1 12 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314325598 Noe Garcia 33 M Fatality Other Carpenters FallDist: 30 Cause: Exterior carpentry FatCause: Exterior carpentry Accident 201956000 - Asphyxiation By Gas Accident 201956000 -- Report ID: 0522000 -- Event Date: 04/05/2010 Inspection: 314342981 Open: 04/06/2010 SIC: 1623 Rla Investments Inc. Two emloyees of a utility contractor were involved with the replacement of natural gas line risers at single family homes. A 3' deep hole was hand dug, approximately 18" in diameter, to access the main 1" gas line. A Footage squeeze tool is clamped onto the 1" main and the old riser assembly is removed. During the process of installing the new riser, the clamp was removed causing the flow of natural gas to enter the excavated hole. The deceased was found by the co-worker face down in the hole overcome by the gas. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling Maintenance or repair $50,000 to $250,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314342981 Cody Faul 27 M Fatality Asphyxia FallDist: 01 FatCause: Trenching, installing pipe Accident 200123164 - Heat Stress Accident 200123164 -- Report ID: 0523400 -- Event Date: 05/24/2010 Inspection: 313529075 Open: 07/26/2010 SIC: 1771 Gary Phillips On July 22, 2010 the Milwaukee Area Office received notification from the Waukesha County District Attorney's office that on May 24, 2010 a 19 year-old male employee, working for Gary Phillips, suffered a heat stroke incident and subsequently died on June 2, 2010. It appears from the report that the employee and company owner were preparing and pouring a concrete patio when the employee began to show signs of heat exhaustion/heat stress eventually losing consciousness. EMT were called and the employee was transported to a local hospital. Due to his worsening conditions the employee was transferred to a major trauma center and later expired. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 1 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 313529075 Derrick Lopez 19 M Fatality Heat Exhaustion FallDist: 24 FatCause: Pouring concrete foundations and walls Accident 200542009 - Death From Heat Stroke Accident 200542009 -- Report ID: 0317500 -- Event Date: 07/06/2010 Inspection: 314109109 Open: 07/09/2010 SIC: 1799 Kolat Construction An employee was working construction, installing a residential swimming pool. For approximately 11 hours, the employee shoveled gravel and installed forms. After work, the employee became sick. The owner of the company called EMS. The employee was life-flighted to Ruby Hospital in Morgantown, West Virginia. The employee's core body temperature was 109.4 degrees F. The employee died at 7:22 pm. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Single family or duplex dwelling New project or new addition Under $50,000 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 314109109 Michael Czerwien 25 M Fatality Heat Exhaustion Construction Laborers FallDist: 24 Cause: Swimming pool construction FatCause: Swimming pool construction
- Accident 200533974 - Overcome By Carbon Monoxide Accident 200533974 -- Report ID: 0751910 -- Event Date: 12/12/2010 Inspection: 315200519 Open: 12/13/2010 SIC: 1522 Rotert Construction Company A new six unit apartment construction site in Carroll, Iowa had electric heaters energized by gas powered generators to prevent heaving of concrete floor. During the weekend the generators were moved inside the constructed building to prevent damage due to inclement weather or theft of the generators. On Sunday December 12, 2010 at approximately 1915 employee #1 told spouse going to construction site at Ely Drive and Hwy 71 Carroll, Iowa to re-fuel generators. Spouse called employee #1's cell phone with no response at 2001. Spouse found employee #1 unresponsive in lower unit apartment where generators were running inside building. The exhaust was so thick spouse of employee #1 had trouble seeing employee #1 face down on the ground right inside the doorway. Emergency rescue arrived on-site and began CPR. Employee #1 had a carboxyhemoglobin level of greater than 75Employee #1 was pronounced dead at 2128 in the hospitals emergency room. End Use Proj Type Proj Cost Stories NonBldgHt Fatality Multi-family dwelling New project or new addition $50,000 to $250,000 2 X Inspection Age Sex Degree Nature Occupation Construction 1 315200519 Stephen Weeks 55 M Fatality Asphyxia Construction Laborers FallDist: 01 Cause: Temporary work (buildings, facilities) FatCause: Other Activities-Post Decking Detail There were three subcontractors who died from carbon monoxide poisoning and a fourth subcontractor who was hospitalized with carbon monoxide poisoning from either a generator or a kerosene space heater that had been running to provide heat to the individuals who went to sleep in a single family home under construction. Only one of the subcontractors, a drywaller, had worked at the site and in this home. The other three subcontractors, including the one survivor, were roofers. All four were Hispanic workers.
- Overview Workers who are exposed to extreme heat or work in hot environments may be at risk of heat stress. Exposure to extreme heat can result in occupational illnesses and injuries. Heat stress can result in heat stroke, heat exhaustion, heat cramps, or heat rashes. Heat can also increase the risk of injuries in workers as it may result in sweaty palms, fogged-up safety glasses, and dizziness. Burns may also occur as a result of accidental contact with hot surfaces or steam. Workers at risk of heat stress include outdoor workers and workers in hot environments such as firefighters, bakery workers, farmers, construction workers, miners, boiler room workers, factory workers, and others. Workers at greater risk of heat stress include those who are 65 years of age or older, are overweight, have heart disease or high blood pressure, or take medications that may be affected by extreme heat. Prevention of heat stress in workers is important. Employers should provide training to workers so they understand what heat stress is, how it affects their health and safety, and how it can be prevented. Types of Heat Stress Heat Stroke | Heat Exhaustion | Heat Syncope | Heat Cramps | Heat Rash Heat Stroke Heat stroke is the most serious heat-related disorder. It occurs when the body becomes unable to control its temperature: the body's temperature rises rapidly, the sweating mechanism fails, and the body is unable to cool down. When heat stroke occurs, the body temperature can rise to 106 degrees Fahrenheit or higher within 10 to 15 minutes. Heat stroke can cause death or permanent disability if emergency treatment is not given. Symptoms Symptoms of heat stroke include: Hot, dry skin (no sweating) Hallucinations Chills Throbbing headache High body temperature Confusion/dizziness Slurred speech First Aid Take the following steps to treat a worker with heat stroke: Call 911 and notify their supervisor. Move the sick worker to a cool shaded area. Cool the worker using methods such as: Soaking their clothes with water. Spraying, sponging, or showering them with water. Fanning their body. Heat Exhaustion Heat exhaustion is the body's response to an excessive loss of the water and salt, usually through excessive sweating. Workers most prone to heat exhaustion are those that are elderly, have high blood pressure, and those working in a hot environment. Symptoms Symptoms of heat exhaustion include: Heavy sweating Extreme weakness or fatigue Dizziness, confusion Nausea Clammy, moist skin Pale or flushed complexion Muscle cramps Slightly elevated body temperature Fast and shallow breathing First Aid Treat a worker suffering from heat exhaustion with the following: Have them rest in a cool, shaded or air-conditioned area. Have them drink plenty of water or other cool, nonalcoholic beverages. Have them take a cool shower, bath, or sponge bath. Heat Syncope Heat syncope is a fainting (syncope) episode or dizziness that usually occurs with prolonged standing or sudden rising from a sitting or lying position. Factors that may contribute to heat syncope include dehydration and lack of acclimatization. Symptoms Symptoms of heat syncope include: Light-headedness Dizziness Fainting First Aid Workers with heat syncope should: Sit or lie down in a cool place when they begin to feel symptoms. Slowly drink water, clear juice, or a sports beverage. Heat Cramps Heat cramps usually affect workers who sweat a lot during strenuous activity. This sweating depletes the body's salt and moisture levels. Low salt levels in muscles causes painful cramps. Heat cramps may also be a symptom of heat exhaustion. Symptoms Muscle pain or spasms usually in the abdomen, arms, or legs. First Aid Workers with heat cramps should: Stop all activity, and sit in a cool place. Drink clear juice or a sports beverage. Do not return to strenuous work for a few hours after the cramps subside because further exertion may lead to heat exhaustion or heat stroke. Seek medical attention if any of the following apply: The worker has heart problems. The worker is on a low-sodium diet. The cramps do not subside within one hour. Heat Rash Heat rash is a skin irritation caused by excessive sweating during hot, humid weather. Symptoms Symptoms of heat rash include: Heat rash looks like a red cluster of pimples or small blisters. It is more likely to occur on the neck and upper chest, in the groin, under the breasts, and in elbow creases. First Aid Workers experiencing heat rash should: Try to work in a cooler, less humid environment when possible. Keep the affected area dry. Dusting powder may be used to increase comfort. Recommendations for Employers Employers should take the following steps to protect workers from heat stress: Schedule maintenance and repair jobs in hot areas for cooler months. Schedule hot jobs for the cooler part of the day. Acclimatize workers by exposing them for progressively longer periods to hot work environments. Reduce the physical demands of workers. Use relief workers or assign extra workers for physically demanding jobs. Provide cool water or liquids to workers. Avoid drinks with caffeine, alcohol, or large amounts of sugar. Provide rest periods with water breaks. Provide cool areas for use during break periods. Monitor workers who are at risk of heat stress. Provide heat stress training that includes information about: Worker risk Prevention Symptoms The importance of monitoring yourself and coworkers for symptoms Treatment Personal protective equipment Recommendations for Workers Workers should avoid exposure to extreme heat, sun exposure, and high humidity when possible. When these exposures cannot be avoided, workers should take the following steps to prevent heat stress: Wear light-colored, loose-fitting, breathable clothing such as cotton. Avoid non-breathing synthetic clothing. Gradually build up to heavy work. Schedule heavy work during the coolest parts of day. Take more breaks in extreme heat and humidity. Take breaks in the shade or a cool area when possible. Drink water frequently. Drink enough water that you never become thirsty. Avoid drinks with caffeine, alcohol, and large amounts of sugar. Be aware that protective clothing or personal protective equipment may increase the risk of heat stress. Monitor your physical condition and that of your coworkers. CDC Resources MMWR: Heat-Related Deaths among Crop Workers, 1992-2006 CDC: Extreme Heat Additional information on heat stress illnesses and prevention. En Español NIOSH: Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Hot Environments (Revised Criteria 1986) This document presents the criteria, techniques, and procedures for the assessment, evaluation, and control of occupational heat stress by engineering and preventive work practices. Included are ways of predicting health risks, procedures for control of heat stress, and techniques for prevention and treatment of heat-related illnesses. NIOSH: Working in Hot Environments Workers who are suddenly exposed to working in a hot environment face additional and generally avoidable hazards to their safety and health. This publication discusses the safety and health consequences of heat stress. Health Hazard Evaluations Health Hazard Evaluation Report, HETA 2004-0334-3017 , Transportation Security Administration, Palm Beach International Airport, West Palm Beach, Florida Health Hazard Evaluation Report, HETA 2003-0311-3052 , Evaluation of Heat Stress at a Glass Bottle Manufacturer, Lapel, Indiana Health Hazard Evaluation Report, HETA 2000-0061-2885 , United States Air Force, Seymour Johnson air Force Base, Goldsboro, North Carolina Other Government Resources Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Safety and Health Topics: Heat Stress Provides a guide to information regarding the recognition, evaluation, control, and compliance actions involving heat stress. OSHA Technical Manual Section III: Chapter 4 - Heat Stress Provides descriptions of heat disorders, investigative guidelines, sampling methods, control, and PPE. OSHA Sawmills eTool : Heat Stresses Provides information on the hazards of heat stress and possible solutions or controls. OSHA Quick Card: Heat Stress Provides heat stress factors, symptoms, prevention tips, and first aid recommendations. En Español OSHA Fact Sheet: Protecting Workers from Effects of Heat [PDF - 22 KB] Provides information that will help workers understand what heat stress is, how it may affect their health and safety, and how it can be prevented. OSHA Fact Sheet: Working Outdoors in Warm Climates [PDF - 25 KB] Hot summer months pose special hazards for outdoor workers who must protect themselves against heat, sun exposure, and other hazards. Employers and employees should know the potential hazards in their workplaces and how to manage them.