OSHA violation

[Darin Redding]

Hi All,

Need some quick help with an electrical issue. One of my commercial properties had an inspection recently and the compliance officer cited the location for 29 CFR 1910.303(b)(2), specifically, "(2) Installation and use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be used or installed in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling."

The apparent violation involved some extension cords that had quad junction boxes attached to the end to provide temporary power. The quad boxes were the type with metal knock-outs present, and all of the original knock-outs were in place. The inspector said this was not an acceptable use for this type of box, although a box of similar material with no knock-outs, or one with screw-in knock-outs would be acceptable. Seems like a stretch to me, but the property is facing a violation of $2K for this.

Anyone have supporting documentation I can use that might help contest this citation, or at least minimize the damage?

[Robert Meier]

These (or equal) are the types of boxes that you need to use:



Personally I know that this is an OSHA requirement but I don't see how it falls under the section that you've quoted unless these boxes are specifically listed for this application and the other type is not. IMO the $2000 fine is excessive for this violation.

[Jim Port]

I agree with RM. I think part of it has to do with the durability of the stamped or welded box and also the possibility of the knockouts either falling out or contacting a live part.

[James H. Bushart]

Proof of compliance by the abatement date will usually reduce the fine by at least 50%.

[Jim Port]

There is a also a requirement for GFI protection for cordsets used for temporary usage. It cannot be supplied by a standard GFI receptacle.

[James H. Bushart]

29 CFR citation, please?

[Darin Redding]

There is a also a requirement for GFI protection for cordsets used for temporary usage.

Good point Jim and fortunately, this was not cited.

Proof of compliance by the abatement date will usually reduce the fine by at least 50%.

All citations were abated while the inspector was on property so these are the fines.

Robert - those boxes shown are to be used for temporary power cord sets?

I suppose I am looking for the CFR that addresses that the boxes used in this case with the knock-outs are not listed for this use. Underwriters Laboratories UL 231 I believe addresses cord sets but I don't see a reference to the use of boxes with knock-outs.

[Jim Port]

This is probably the relevant NEC Article.

(H) Pendant Boxes.

An enclosure supported by a pendant
shall comply with 314.23(H)(1) or (2).

(1) Flexible Cord.

A box shall be supported from a multiconductor
cord or cable in an approved manner that protects
the conductors against strain, such as a strain-relief
connector threaded into a box with a hub.

[Darin Redding]

Thanks Jim. I also found this OSHA interpretation:

http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...ONS&p_id=20709

So there we are. Nothing to contest. Pay the fine. Thanks all for your input, much appreciated.

[Claude Lawrenson]

So which inspectors previously stated OSHA had no jurisdiction? This an unfortunate common belief, until they show up. Thanks for passing your experience along.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

So which inspectors previously stated OSHA had no jurisdiction? This an unfortunate common belief, until they show up. Thanks for passing your experience along.

He said it was a "commercial property". I took that to mean he owns it and had employees working in it. The employers working in the property are covered by the Act. The owner of the property would not be, in my opinion, unless they had employees there.

By the way, it doesn't sound to me like you got a $2,000 fine for that one thing. Just because you abated the other violations during the inspection doesn't mean you don't get cited for those too.

I've forgotten a lot of stuff, but I worked as a compliance officer for 4 years in the 80s.

[Darin Redding]

By the way, it doesn't sound to me like you got a $2,000 fine for that one thing. Just because you abated the other violations during the inspection doesn't mean you don't get cited for those too.

All 3 violations were abated, didn't matter as the area director has since assessed the following fines:

$2,500 - no electrical disconnect at a kitchen mixer (was hard wired, now plug-in)
$2,500 - no lock-out/tag-out devices applied to disconnect. This one is an easy contest since there were no devices actively locked out during the inspection. Proper LO devices exist in the correct numbers, and there is staff on-site and trained in proper LO techniques and methods.
$2,000 - The cord sets described in this post.

This is a commercial building in the eastern U.S. I do not own or work for the employer, I am retained as a consultant.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

In SC, back in the 80s, the easiest thing to do was to 'volunteer' to enter the "consultation program" (I think that's what it was called). You have to do the abatement and consent to "consultation inspections" but that took you completely out of the enforcement side of OSHA. Check into it.

I wouldn't waste much time trying to prove OSHA wrong. They hold all the cards and are generally right (they do that stuff for a living!).

[Darin Redding]

the easiest thing to do was to 'volunteer' to enter the "consultation program"...

Yes Joe, I am aware of that program. Not a bad idea, however as a business owner you must accept the fact that you will frequently open your doors to regular inspections. Not something that the managers who own the buildings that I inspect wish to stomach at the moment. They figure that when OSHA comes around, they get fined. So you want me to invite them here? Perhaps at some point I can get them to understand the benefits of this program.

We perform "Mock OSHA inspections" at these locations and follow the same protocol that OSHA would use. These are unannounced inspections and they have no idea we are visiting. Good fun for me, and good training for all involved.

[James H. Bushart]

Unsafe conditions that exist at a workplace or worksite....whether it is a "commercial building" or contractors who are working in your front yard.....fall under the jurisdiction of OSHA.

Whether it is simply the owner of the company...or twenty of his employees...at the site, if the conditions are unsafe they are subject to citations.

An OSHA inspector has the right (and the duty, he will tell you) to address every unsafe act or condition that he observes in any workplace....even a fast food joint in which he is having lunch.

Participation in voluntary programs has no bearing on what an OSHA inspector will do if called to the site by an employee or if he observes the condition or act on his own.