This case is especially sad (or disgusting)… the company was cited a Willful in 2012 regarding a failed rescue attempt when a 37-year-old supervisor was nearly buried alive in a 25-foot silo containing 50,000 pounds of sand. Plant employees allegedly attempted to rescue the supervisor after he became engulfed in a sand bin and suffered serious crushing injuries for more than an hour before the company summoned emergency assistance. The company contested the citations, during which time OSHA returned to the plant in July 2013 to investigate this PRCS fatality. So while the company “lawyered up” after one of their supervisors was engulfed, another employee (a temporary employee this time) died inside a PRCS that was not isolated, no permit issued – NOTHING done to give this temp worker a chance!
A precast concrete products manufacturer has been cited for eight safety violations after a temporary worker was fatally crushed at a concrete batch plant while working alone in a permit-required confined space on July 20, 2013. The 39-year-old Hispanic worker had entered a concrete mixer’s discharge mud hopper. He tried to free a pneumatically powered discharge gate stuck in the open position because of hardened concrete. The gate, which had not been isolated to prevent unintentional operation during maintenance activity, closed and crushed the worker. The worker was a long-term temporary employee provided by a staffing services company. He was supervised solely by concrete batch plant management. The staffing service was not cited. Due to the willful violations found at the site, the company has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law. OSHA issued four willful citations involving the worker’s entry into the concrete mixer’s discharge hopper, including failure to:
- Inform employees of the existence, location and danger posed by the concrete mixer and discharge hopper
- Ensure the concrete mixer and discharge hopper were isolated from the hazards of the concrete mixing system and associated process materials prior to employee entry
- As part of the isolation process, ensure that the concrete mixer’s pneumatically powered discharge gate was de-energized and locked out prior to employee entry
- Prepare an entry permit and provide an attendant for employee entry
Additionally, four serious citations were cited for:
- lacking a standard guardrail or equivalent on an open-sided platform
- not using ingress and egress equipment for maintenance performed in the mixer’s discharge hopper
- lack of a non-entry rescue retrieval system for maintenance performed in the mixer’s discharge hopper, and
- failing to conduct annual inspections of energy control procedures at the plant
OSHA has proposed fines of $303,900.
OSHA last inspected the company in February 2012. The inspection resulted in four violations, including one willful confined-space violation. The employer contested the alleged violations. The Chicago Regional Solicitor’s Office tried the resulting case at a hearing before Administrative Law Judge Carol Baumerich of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission in June 2013. The judge has not rendered a decision in the case.
Here is a breakdown of the citations:
Citation 1 Item 1
Type of Violation: Serious; $7,000
29 CFR 1910.23(c)(1 ): Open-sided floors and/or platforms four feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level were not guarded with standard railings (or equivalent) and toeboards:
On or about July 20, 2013, a platform was not guarded by standard railing or its equivalent near the south side of the Batch Plant 3 mixer, exposing employees to a fall hazard of approximately 18 feet.
Citation 1 Item 2
Type of Violation: Serious; $4,400
29 CFR 1910.146(d)(4)(vii): Under the permit-required confined space program required by 29 CFR 1910.146(c)(4), the employer did not provide, maintain, and ensure the proper use of equipment, such as ladders, needed for safe ingress and egress by authorized entrants:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer did not ensure that an authorized employee entrant into the Batch Plant 3 mud hopper used equipment needed for safe ingress and egress.
Citation 1 Item 3
Type of Violation: Serious; $5,500 29
CFR 1910.146(k)(3) When an authorized entrant entered a permit space, retrieval systems or methods were not used to facilitate non-entry rescue:
On or about July 20, 2013, an employee entered the mud hopper in Batch Plant 3 without the use of a retrieval system or method to facilitate non-entry rescue.
Citation 1 Item 4
Type of Violation: Serious; $7,000
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(6)(i): The employer did not conduct a periodic inspection of the energy control procedure at least annually to ensure that the procedure and the requirement of this standard were being followed:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer had not conducted a periodic inspection of their energy control procedures for equipment in Batch Plant 3 in the past year.
Citation 2 Item 1
Type of Violation: Willful; $70,000
29 CPR 1910.146(c)(2): The employer did not inform exposed employees, by posting danger signs or by any other equally effective means, of the existence and location of and the danger posed by the permit spaces:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer did not inform exposed employees, by posting danger signs or by any other equally effective means, of the existence and location of and the danger posed by the Batch Plant 3 mixer and mud hopper.
Citation 2 Item 2a
Type of Violation: Willful; $70,000
29 CFR 1910.146(d)(3)(iii): Under the permit-required confined space program required by 29 CFR 1910.146(c)(4), the employer did not develop and implement the means, procedures, and practices necessary for safe permit space entry operations, including isolating the permit space:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer did not implement the means, procedures, and practices necessary for isolating the mixer and mud hopper in Batch Plant 3 from the hazards of the concrete mixing system and associated process materials.
Citation 2 Item 2b
Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped
29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures were not developed, documented and utilized for the.control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer did not utilize established energy control procedures when an employee performed maintenance on the Batch Plant 3 mixer.
Citation 2 Item 2c
Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped
29 CFR 1910.147(d)(3): All energy isolating devices that were needed to control the energy to the machine or equipment were not physically located and operated in such a manner as to isolate the machine or equipment from the energy source(s):
On or about July 20, 2013, maintenance work was performed on the Batch Plant 3 mixer without operating a line valve to isolate the mixer gate from the pneumatic energy source.
Citation 2 Item 2d
Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped
29 CFR 1910.147(d)(4)(i):Lockout or tagout devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees:
On or about July 20, 2013, maintenance work was performed on the Batch Plant 3 mixer without a lockout device affixed to a pneumatic energy isolation device (line valve).
Citation 2 Item 2e
Type of Violation: Willful; Grouped
29 CFR 1910.147(d)(5)(i): All potentially hazardous stored or residual energy was not relieved, disconnected, restrained or otherwise rendered safe after the application of lockout or tagout devices to energy isolating devices:
On or about July 20, 2013, maintenance work was performed on the Batch Plant 3 mixer without relieving pneumatic energy that powered the mixer gate.
Citation 2 Item 3
Type of Violation: Willful; $70,000
29 CFR 1910.146(d)(6): The employer did not provide at least one attendant outside the permit space into which entry was authorized for the duration of entry operations:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer did not provide an attendant during an authorized employee entry into the Batch Plant 3 mud hopper.
Citation 2 Item 4
Type of Violation: Willful; $70,000
29 CFR 1910.146(e)(l): Before· entry was authorized, the employer did not document the completion of measures required by 29 CFR 1910.146(d)(3) by preparing an entry permit:
On or about July 20, 2013, employer did not prepare an entry permit for an authorized employee entry into the Batch Plant 3 mud hopper.
The current citations can be viewed at http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/Dukane_Precast_Incorporated_922746_0117_14.pdf*
Here is the link to the company’s response to the 2012 incident when a Supervisor, 37, was engulfed in sand inside a 25′ tall silo and OSHA citations http://www.paintsquare.com/news/?fuseaction=view&id=8164. Please note that the company is proud of itself for calling OSHA on their own. The next time they should try calling the Fire Department when they have a worker engulfed in sand for 1-hour!!!! It took four (4) hours for the FD’s rescue team to complete the rescue with the aid of 22 surrounding departments!
SAFTENG MEMBERS can CLICK HERE to download citations.
