A 46-year-old worker at a Boston steel fabrication shop died on Dec. 9, 2013, when a 12,000-pound steel bridge arch beam that he was spray painting fell and crushed him. An investigation by OSHA found that his employer, Boston Bridge & Steel Inc., failed to ensure that the fallen beam and three similar beams were adequately braced or supported to prevent them from falling while workers painted them.

"This death should not have happened-and would not have happened-if these beams had been properly secured," said Brenda Gordon, OSHA's area director for Boston and southeastern Massachusetts.

The employees, who were cleaning and spray painting the beams, also lacked adequate respiratory protection against vapors generated during the spray painting. The workers, who wore half-face respirators, had not been evaluated to determine their medical fitness to use respirators and had not been supplied with the correct respirator filters. The employees had not been informed and trained about the hazards associated with chemicals used during spray painting.

Flying debris, flash burns and electic shock hazards

Additional hazards at the Marginal Street workplace included flying debris from an unguarded grinder and the use of a cleaning hose with excess air pressure; flash burns due to missing screens where welding was performed; electric shock and fire hazards from misused electrical cords and missing electrical knockouts; falls from a damaged access ladder; and slips and trips from accumulated ice and snow on an emergency exit route.

The company was cited for 13 serious violations for these conditions.

Different company name, same violations

Two repeat violations were cited for conditions similar to those cited by OSHA during 2010 and 2011 inspections, when the plant was known as Tuckerman Steel Fabrication Inc. These included fall hazards from an unguarded crane access platform and electrical hazards from running a flexible power cord through the wall to power equipment located outside the building.

Boston Bridge & Steel Inc., which faces $72,450 in proposed fines