Citation Details


Back to citations


Section: 56.14207
Date: 02/15/2011
District: NE
Negligence: High
Injury or Illness: Unlikely
Injury or illness could be expected to be: Lost Workdays or Restricted Only
Significant and Substantial: No

Condition or Practice: The foreman who is operating the #40608 Chevy 1500 pick up truck failed to set the parking brake when unattended. The hazard is the truck moving when unattended. This truck parks on level ground and has a automatic transmission. The foreman said he was in the spring thaw when the rules to live by were discussed. Foreman XXXXXXXXXX engaged in aggravated conduct constituting more than ordinary negligence in that he is a foreman and knows the standards. This violation is an unwarrantable to comply with a mandatory standard.

Action to Terminate: none listed

Why this concerns you: This citation has so many issues that it can be used as the "Poster Child" for what is wrong with the current attitude and gotcha mentality at MSHA. First of all the "truck parks on level ground and has a automatic transmission" Normally this would be not qualify as a 104d, but the inspector states that since the foreman attended a Spring Thaw and the rules to live by were discussed at this Spring Thaw, the foreman thus "engaged in aggravated conduct constituting more than ordinary negligence". Therefore a $100 penalty is now a $2,000 penalty since the foreman attended a Spring Thaw. It will be difficult for any operator to send his/her employees to any MSHA attended or hosted event for fear of increasing their exposure to higher negligence/liability and penalties for attending this voluntary event.



Abatement Suggestions From Industry


1) I have always been curious about the rates/incidents of vehicles with automatic transmissions rolling. Is there any data on this?

2) I would contest the citation simply to get MSHA in front of an ALJ, and then ask if the inspector has proof that the foreman was present when the "rules to live by" were discussed. Does MSHA have a signed document of attendees? Can MSHA prove the foreman didn't step out of the room to answer nature's call? Make a phone call?

3) What is the difference between attending a Spring Thaw (and thus, everything becomes unwarrantable failures to comply) and having a copy of the CFR on your desk? Aren't both, under MSHA's logic, enough to say "you should have known"? Thus, why does MSHA even bother with 104(a) citations? Shouldn't everything be immediate withdrawl orders, because management knows the rules, or should have known the rules, because they were published and available for years.
- posted on 02/18/2011


I hope your local congressman and Senator have received copies of this citation. This and the lack of MSHA participation here in Illinois' spring thaw shows that this is probably one less informative seminar for producers to mark on their calendars. If the motive to get operator's to attend these meetings is for MSHA to use against them in writing citations, count me out. It proves that MSHA is no longer interested in the safety side, but only enforcement.
- posted on 04/06/2011


Post a Comment


We have provided a place where you can post your professional comment or add additional information regarding this citation. Before doing so, please read the following guidelines:

Be nice!
If you are angry, step back and take a breath.

Post like you are talking to someone face-to-face. Better yet, post it like your mother is going to read it.

Don't discuss anything that might be construed as restraining trade. Nothing about boycotts and we certainly don't want to read about the price of rock.


Be honest!
Keep it factual. There is absolutely no need to exaggerate; some citations are hard enough to believe as is. Mine safety is important and those who visit the site must be able to rely on posts being accurate.


We review all posts
Sorry, but all posts come to us first. We want this site to be effective, and we want you to use it. The site can only be effective if it is legal and professional. If we get something that isn't both, we won't post it. None of us want that to happen.


No Guarantees
Anyone who has been a mine safety professional for long knows what one inspector approves, another may consider a violation. As much as we would like to, we cannot guarantee any solution offered here will work for your situation. We certainly hope what others have done provides helpful ideas, but we aren't willing to bet the farm on it passing an inspection and you shouldn't either.


Your name and email will not be shown when you post your comment. We ask for these fields because it helps us identify association members and keeps spam off the website.

Your Name

Your Email

Member Of

*

Comment


Any comments or opinions shown on this website reflect the views and opinions of the individuals or organization who posted them and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the parties sponsoring or supporting this website. The sponsors are not responsible for the content of any comment posted on this website.