The Eleventh Circuit reinstates OSHA’s LOTO Citation regarding a contractor death

This is SIGNIFICANT for those who truly believe in the purpose and function of OSHA’s LOTO standard.  I was never more disappointed in an ALJ than after they decided to vacate such a clear violation of LOTO.  I may have even said, “Why do lawyers/judges make for bad safety professionals.”  This fatality involved an apprentice for an electrical contractor working at a steel mill.  He was standing next to his “Leadman” when he died.  Both of these workers knew the mill managed their basement much like a confined space, such that entry into the basement required a work permit, which the work permit required the equipment in the basement to be locked out.  The Lead and apprentice entered the basement to review their scope work BEFORE they had their entry permit.  They had planned to stay within the designated safety areas (marked by lines on the floor) but had not done so.  Knowing the contractor needed to go into the basement, the mill technician was locking out the required equipment to make it safe for them to do their “scope of work.”  While the mill technician was in the process of locking out the equipment, one such step was to release stored energy, causing a counterweight to fall from an energized position and fatally strike the contractor apprentice (killing him).  OSHA cited the contractor for LOTO as neither worker had applied their lock to the lockbox before entering the basement and venturing out of the safety zones.  The contractor challenged the citation, and the ALJ vacated it, then the full OSHRC supported the ALJ decision.  OSHA took it to the appeals court, and the court UPHELD OSHA’s citation.

This is a VERY IMPORTANT decision as this case deals with LARGE and COMPLEX equipment and what falls within the scope of LOTO when the scope of work is narrow and would NOT require all energy sources applicable to the equipment to be LOTO’ed – much like we deal with in a chemical process unit.  The court used words like “complex”, “Large”, etc. in their language, further explaining how 1910.147 will apply to processes (e.g. two or more “machines/equipment” interconnected).

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Scroll to Top