<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
		<title>Turner Construction, Inc. of Naples OSHRC Docket No.: 19-0768</title>
		<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8"/>
		<style type="text/css">
 p.hiddenParagraph { visibility:hidden } 
 p { widows:0; orphans:0; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; widows:0; orphans:0; margin-top:0; font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; color:WindowText; } 
 p { font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman;  }  p.style_Normal { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_Normal span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 p.style_Heading1 { outline-width:1; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:5.667px; line-height:1.0791666666666666; text-align:center; margin-left:.667px; text-indent:-.018cm; margin-right:4.467px; font-size:13pt; font-family:Times New Roman; color:#000000; } 
.style_Heading1 span { font-family:Times New Roman; color:#000000; } 
 span.style_DefaultParagraphFont { } 
 table.style_TableNormal { } 
 p.style_NormalWeb { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; margin-top:6.667px; margin-bottom:6.667px; widows:2; orphans:2; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_NormalWeb span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 p.style_FootnoteText { font-size:10pt; } 
.style_FootnoteText span { } 
 span.style_FootnoteTextChar { font-size:10pt; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_FootnoteTextChar span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 span.style_FootnoteReference { position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;} 
.style_FootnoteReference span { position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;} 
 span.style_Emphasis { font-style:italic; } 
.style_Emphasis span { font-style:italic; } 
 p.style_Header { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; } 
 span.style_HeaderChar { font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_HeaderChar span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 p.style_Footer { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; } 
 span.style_FooterChar { font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_FooterChar span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 span.style_apple-style-span { } 
 span.style_apple-converted-space { } 
 p.style_BalloonText { font-size:8pt; font-family:Tahoma; } 
.style_BalloonText span { font-family:Tahoma; } 
 span.style_BalloonTextChar { font-size:8pt; font-family:Tahoma; } 
.style_BalloonTextChar span { font-family:Tahoma; } 
 span.style_Hyperlink { color:#0000FF; text-decoration:underline ;} 
.style_Hyperlink span { color:#0000FF; text-decoration:underline ;} 
 p.style_ListParagraph { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; margin-left:48px; widows:2; orphans:2; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_ListParagraph span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 span.style_Heading1Char { font-size:13pt; font-family:Times New Roman; color:#000000; } 
.style_Heading1Char span { font-family:Times New Roman; color:#000000; } 
 table.style_TableGrid1 { } 
.style_TableGrid1 span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 table.style_TableGrid { } 
 p.style_Default { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1; font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; color:#000000; } 
.style_Default span { font-family:Times New Roman; color:#000000; } 
 span.style_CommentReference { font-size:8pt; } 
.style_CommentReference span { } 
 p.style_CommentText { font-size:10pt; } 
.style_CommentText span { } 
 span.style_CommentTextChar { font-size:10pt; font-family:Times New Roman; } 
.style_CommentTextChar span { font-family:Times New Roman; } 
 p.style_CommentSubject { font-weight:bold; } 
.style_CommentSubject span { font-weight:bold; } 
 span.style_CommentSubjectChar { font-size:10pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-weight:bold; } 
.style_CommentSubjectChar span { font-family:Times New Roman; font-weight:bold; } 
 span.X3AS7TOCHyperlink { color:#000000; text-decoration:none; } 
 p.X3AS7TABSTYLE { } 
 span.BulletSymbol { font-family:'Symbol'; } 
 body { margin-left:96px;margin-top:96px;margin-bottom:96px;margin-right:96px;} 
div.basic { width:16.51cm;height:22.86cm;} 
 p.hiddenParagraph { font-size:2pt; visibility:hidden; } 
</style>
		<script type="text/javascript">
							var useragent = navigator.userAgent;
							var navigatorname;
							if (useragent.indexOf('MSIE')!= -1)
							{
							navigatorname="MSIE";
							}
							else if (useragent.indexOf('Gecko')!= -1)
							{
							if (useragent.indexOf('Chrome')!= -1)
							navigatorname="Google Chrome";
							else
							navigatorname="Mozilla";
							}
							else if (useragent.indexOf('Mozilla')!= -1)
							{
							navigatorname="old Netscape or Mozilla";
							}
							else if (useragent.indexOf('Opera')!= -1)
							{
							navigatorname="Opera";
							}
							
							function symbol(code1,code2)
							{
							if (navigatorname == 'MSIE')
								document.write(code1);
							else
								document.write(code2);
							}
							</script>
	</head>
	<body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="basic"><div>
				<p style="text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">United States of America</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-align:center; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">
					</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-align:center; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">1120 20th Street, N.W., 9</span><span style="position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">th</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Floor</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-align:center; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Washington, DC 20036-3457</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-align:center; "> </p>
			</div>
			<table class="style_TableGrid1" style="border-collapse:collapse; width:auto; align:left; margin-left:0cm; margin-bottom:0cm">
				<tr style="margin:0;border:0;padding:0;visibility:hidden;">
					<th style="width:290.933px;"/>
					<th style="width:325.867px;"/>
				</tr>
				<tr style="height:1.196cm; ">
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Vert" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:none, 0, inherit; border-right:solid .018cm #000000; border-top:solid .026cm #000000; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:7.698cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="margin-top:8px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Secretary of Labor,</span></p>
						</div>
					</td>
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Horz" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:solid .018cm #000000; border-right:none, 0, inherit; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:8.622cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "> </p>
						</div>
					</td>
				</tr>
				<tr style="height:.635cm; ">
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Vert" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:none, 0, inherit; border-right:solid .018cm #000000; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:7.698cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Complainant</span></p>
						</div>
					</td>
					<td style="vertical-align:top;border-left:solid .018cm #000000; border-right:none, 0, inherit; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:8.622cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "> </p>
						</div>
					</td>
				</tr>
				<tr style="height:.683cm; ">
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Vert" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:none, 0, inherit; border-right:solid .018cm #000000; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:7.698cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> v.</span></p>
						</div>
					</td>
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Horz" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:solid .018cm #000000; border-right:none, 0, inherit; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:8.622cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; margin-bottom:0cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">OSHRC Docket No.:<span>
									</span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">19-0</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">768</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">
								</span></p>
						</div>
					</td>
				</tr>
				<tr style="height:.762cm; ">
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Vert" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:none, 0, inherit; border-right:solid .018cm #000000; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:7.698cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; margin-bottom:0cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Turner Construction Inc. of Naples,</span></p>
						</div>
					</td>
					<td style="vertical-align:top;border-left:solid .018cm #000000; border-right:none, 0, inherit; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:8.622cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "> </p>
						</div>
					</td>
				</tr>
				<tr style="height:.667cm; ">
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Vert" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:none, 0, inherit; border-right:solid .018cm #000000; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:solid .018cm #000000; width:7.698cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Respondent.</span></p>
						</div>
					</td>
					<td class=" TableGrid1_band1Horz" style="vertical-align:top;border-left:solid .018cm #000000; border-right:none, 0, inherit; border-top:none, 0, inherit; border-bottom:none, 0, inherit; width:8.622cm;">
						<div>
							<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-bottom:0cm; "> </p>
						</div>
					</td>
				</tr>
			</table>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:10.667px; margin-bottom:0px; line-height:1.5; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Appearances:</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Jeremy K. Fisher</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, Esq.<span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>Office of the Solicitor, U.S</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. Department of Labor,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Atlanta, Georgia<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:10.667px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>For Complainant</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Thomas E. Turner, Jr.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Turner Construction Inc. of Naples, Florida</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:10.667px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>For Respondent</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:10.667px; line-height:1.5; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">BEFORE: Administrative Law Judge<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Sharon D. Calhoun</span></p>
			</div>
			<p class="style_Heading1 style_Heading1 " style="outline-width:1; " xmlns:text="urn:oasis:names:tc:opendocument:xmlns:text:1.0" text:is-list-header="true"><span style="font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:13pt; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold; ">
				</span><span style="font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:13pt; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold; ">DECISION AND ORDER</span></p>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Turner Constriction Inc. of Naples (Turner Construction), located in Naples, Florida, operates a construction company,<span>
					</span>which<span><span></span>
					</span>performs concrete and masonry services (Tr. 7, 67). On January 8, 2019, a Turner Construction employee was exposed to a fall hazard while in the process of performing shell work on a new structure<span>
					</span>at a worksite located at 201 Goodlette Frank Road, Naples, Florida<span>
					</span>(Tr.<span><span></span>
					</span>4-5,<span><span></span>
					</span>21-22). In response to the employee’s fall hazard exposure the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) conducted an inspection at the worksite on January 8, 2019. The inspection was led by OSHA Compliance Safety and Health Officer (CSHO) Michael Marquez (Tr. 21-24). As a result of OSHA’s inspection, the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) issued a Citation and Notification of Penalty (Citation) to<span><span></span>
					</span>Turner Construction on April 26, 2019, alleging<span>
					</span>a repeat violation<span>
					</span>of a standard under the<span>
					</span>Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. §§ 651-678 (Act) as follows:</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Item 1 alleges a<span>
					</span>repeat<span><span></span>
					</span>violation of 29 C.F.R.<span>
					</span>§ 1926.501(b)(1)<span><span></span>
					</span>for failing to<span>
					</span>provide an employee with fall protection while working on a surface more than 6 feet above the next lower level. The Secretary proposes a penalty of $20,420.00<span><span></span>
					</span>for<span>
					</span>item 1.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; ">
					<span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">JURISDICTION AND COVERAGE</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Turner Construction filed a timely notice of contest bringing this matter before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (Commission). Thereafter, the Court held a hearing on January 28, 2020, in Fort Myers, Florida. Both parties filed post-hearing briefs on March 9, 2020. The parties stipulated jurisdiction of this action is conferred upon the Commission pursuant to §10(c) of the Act (Tr.<span>
					</span>9, 14; Joint Prehearing Statement at pp. 2-3). Turner Construction also admits that at all times relevant to this proceeding it was an employer engaged in a business affecting interstate<span>
					</span>commerce within the meaning of § 3(5) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 652(5) (Tr.<span>
					</span>9, 14-15; Joint Prehearing Statement at pp. 2-3).<span><span></span>
					</span><span><span></span>
					</span>Based on the stipulations and the record evidence, the Court finds the Commission has jurisdiction over this proceeding under § 10(c) of the Act and<span>
					</span>Turner Construction<span><span></span>
					</span>is a covered employer under § 3(5) of the Act.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">For the reasons that<span><span></span>
					</span>follow, the Court<span>
					</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">AFFIRMS<span>
						</span></span>Item<span><span></span>
					</span>1<span>
					</span>of the Citation as<span>
					</span>repeat and<span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">ASSESSES</span><span><span></span>
					</span>a<span>
					</span>penalty<span><span></span>
					</span>in the amount of $10,210.00.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "> STIPULATIONS</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; margin-left:48px; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The parties reached the following stipulations which were read into the record:</span></p>
			</div>
			<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_ListParagraph style_ListParagraph " style="margin-left:120px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:72px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-right:48px; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; ">
				<span style="padding-right:20px;">1.</span>Turner Construction was previously cited for a Serious violation of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.501(b)(13) following OSHA’s inspection of a worksite at 901 10<span style="position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; ">th</span><span><span></span>
				</span>Ave., Naples, FL 34101. The Citation was issued on July 18, 2017 and became a final order of the Review Commission on August 23, 2017 after Turner Construction agreed to an Expedited Informal Settlement Agreement.</p>
			<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_ListParagraph style_ListParagraph " style="margin-left:120px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:72px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-right:48px; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; ">
				<span style="padding-right:20px;">2.</span>Turner Construction, at the time of the OSHA inspection, was an employer engaged in business affecting commerce within the meaning of section 3(5) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. § 651,<span>
				</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-style:italic; ">et seq</span>.</p>
			<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_ListParagraph style_ListParagraph " style="margin-left:120px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:72px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-right:48px; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; ">
				<span style="padding-right:20px;">3.</span>OSHA has jurisdiction over Turner Construction as the employer of the employees at the worksite.</p>
			<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_ListParagraph style_ListParagraph " style="margin-left:120px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:72px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-right:48px; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; ">
				<span style="padding-right:20px;">4.</span>Turner Construction timely contested the Citation and the proposed penalty, pursuant to the provision of Section 10(c) of the Act.</p>
			<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_ListParagraph style_ListParagraph " style="margin-left:120px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:72px; text-indent:-.635cm; margin-right:48px; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; ">
				<span style="padding-right:20px;">5.</span>The Citation issued to Turner Construction on July 18, 2017 became a final order of the Review Commission on August 23, 2017 after Turner Construction agreed to an Expedited Informal Settlement Agreement.</p>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; margin-left:-48px; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">(Tr.<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">8</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">-</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">9, 14-15; Joint Prehearing Statement at pp. 2-3</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">). </span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">
					</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">BACKGROUND</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Turner Construction<span><span></span>
					</span>operates as<span>
					</span>a<span>
					</span>concrete and masonry construction company (Tr. 7, 67). It employs approximately 28<span><span></span>
					</span>employees at its<span>
					</span>Naples, Florida<span><span></span>
					</span>facility (Tr.<span>
					</span>65-66). In<span>
					</span>January<span><span></span>
					</span>2019,<span>
					</span>Turner Construction<span><span></span>
					</span>was engaged in<span>
					</span>construction and concrete<span><span></span>
					</span>operations<span>
					</span>regarding<span><span></span>
					</span>a<span>
					</span>structure<span><span></span>
					</span>on<span>
					</span>Goodlette Frank Road, Naples, Florida (Tr. 4-5, 21-22). The structure under construction was part of a residential project, with the structure designated as a storage facility for the complex (Tr. 50). Turner Construction utilized various employees at the worksite. Its worksite management consisted of foreman Fernando Moran and project manager Charles Holiday (Tr. 35-37, 40).<span>
					</span>
				</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">On January 8, 2019, CSHO Marquez<span class="style_DefaultParagraphFont style_DefaultParagraphFont style_FootnoteReference style_FootnoteReference " style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><a name="ftnref1" href="#ftn1">1</a></span><span><span></span>
					</span>was driving through the Naples, Florida region as part of OSHA’s local emphasis program focusing on falls in construction (Tr. 21-22). As<span>
					</span>CSHO<span>
					</span>Marquez was driving, he noticed employees conducting concrete set-up work at a worksite (Tr. 21-22). CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez specifically noticed one of the employees was performing concrete work at significant height with no fall protection (Tr. 21-22; Exs. C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4). From Goodlette Frank Road,<span>
					</span>CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez observed and took pictures of a worker moving a concrete hose on top of the structure (Tr. 21-23; Exs. C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4). CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez estimated that the worker was four to six feet from the edge of the structure and approximately twenty to twenty-two feet above the ground’s surface (Tr. 25).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Following this observation, OSHA initiated its inspection of the worksite (Tr. 24). CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez drove to another side of the structure and continued to take photographs of the worker (Tr. 24-26; Ex. C-2). The worker was moving the concrete hose with his knee while only four to six feet from the outer part of the structure (Tr. 27-29; Exs. C-3, C-3A). The surface the worker was moving the hose on consisted of a landing approximately one and a half feet wide (Tr. 34). CSHO Marquez determined that it would be impossible to work on the landing without fall protection and not be exposed to a hazard (55-56). He<span><span></span>
					</span>measured the height between the employee’s working area and the next<span>
					</span>concrete<span>
					</span>surface to be eleven feet and five inches (Tr. 31; Exs. C-6A, C-7). While the employee was working on the structure’s surface, he did not have any form of fall protection, he was not wearing a harness, and there was no guardrail system in place (Tr. 34-35).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "> </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">During OSHA’s inspection,<span>
					</span>CSHO Marquez<span><span></span>
					</span>met<span><span></span>
					</span>with<span><span></span>
					</span>Fernando Moran, the foreman at the worksite (Tr. 35-37). An opening conference was conducted with Moran who identified himself and the crew as working for Turner Construction (Tr. 36). Moran explained that the workers were preparing for a concrete pour and that he had directed their tasks (Tr. 36-38). He also acknowledged, as the foreman in charge of the worksite and the employees’ tasks, the employee with the concrete hose could have fallen and broken bones (Tr. 35-39; Ex. C-8). CSHO<span>
					</span>Marquez then conducted a conference with Charles Holiday, Turner Construction’s project manager, who had arrived at the worksite after being informed OSHA was on-site (Tr. 40-41, 92-93).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Upon further investigation,<span>
					</span>CSHO<span>
					</span>Marquez learned Turner Construction had been<span><span></span>
					</span>previously cited for a fall protection violation (Tr. 42-44). On July 18, 2017, OSHA had issued a Citation alleging a serious violation of 29 C.F.R.<span>
					</span>§1926.501(b)(13) (Ex. C-9). The Citation alleged that on May 13, 2017, an employee of Turner Construction was exposed to a 13-foot fall hazard while working in Naples (Ex. C-9). During the inspection of this 2017 violation, Thomas Turner, Jr., the owner of Turner Construction, was on the worksite and supervising his employees (Ex. C-10). The Citation was ultimately resolved through the execution of an informal settlement agreement, which became a final order of the Commission on August 23, 2017 (Tr. 15; Ex. C-11).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">As a result of CSHO Marquez’s investigation, OSHA issued Turner Construction one repeat citation alleging a violation of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.501(b)(1)<span><span></span>
					</span>for failure to provide fall protection.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">THE CITATION</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">The Secretary</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">'s Burden of Proof</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">In</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">order to establish a violation of</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>a safety standard under the</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Ac</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">t</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>the Secretary must prove by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) the<span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">applicability of the cited standard</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">; (2) the employer failed to comply with the terms of that standard; (3)<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">employees had access to the hazardous condition covered by the standard; and (4)</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>the employer knew, or with the exercise of reasonable diligence could have known, of the violative condition. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Astra Pharm. Prods</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">., 9 BNA OSHC 2126, 2129 (No. 78-6247, 1981),<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">aff’d in relevant part,</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> 681 F.2d 69 (1st Cir. 1982).</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">Item 1: Alleged<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">Repeat</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Violation of §<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">1926.</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">501(b)(1)</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Alleged Violation Description</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Item 1 alleges:<span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:48px; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">On or about<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">January 8</span><span style="position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">th</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 2019, at Goodlette-Frank Road Naples Florida, 34102, an employee was exposed to an 11 feet<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">5-inch</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>fall hazard while in the process of performing shell work on a new commercial structure.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:48px; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Turner Construction, Inc. of Naples was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard or its equivalent standard 29 C.F.R. 1926.501(b)(13), which was contained in OSHA inspection number 1237261, citation number 1, item number 1 and was affirmed as a final order on August 23, 2017, with respect to a workplace located at 901 10</span><span style="position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">th</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Ave. Naples, Florida 34101.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; text-indent:1.27cm; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Section 1926.501(b)(1)</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Section 1926.501(b)(1) provides:</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="background-color:#FFFFFF; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:8px; text-align:justify; margin-left:48px; margin-right:48px; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Unprotected sides and edges.</span><span><span></span>
					</span>Each employee on a walking/working surface (horizontal and vertical surface) with an unprotected side or edge which is 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above a lower level shall be protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">(1) Applicability of the Cited Standard</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:.635cm; "> Subpart M of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards in Part 1926 addresses the requirements and criteria for fall protection in construction workplaces. The parties do not dispute the provisions of the standard are applicable. The evidence adduced at trial shows Turner Construction’s employee was standing and working on the edge of an upper level surface within the structure under construction (Tr.<span>
					</span>28-31; Exs. C-1, C-2, C-3, C-6A, C-7). While working on the edge of the upper level surface, there was no guardrail or safety net system in place (Tr. 34-35, Ex. C-6A). The employee was not wearing a safety harness or utilizing fall protection lanyards<span><span></span>
					</span>(Tr. 34-35; Exs. C-2, C-3, C-4). The record further shows the employee was working four to six feet from the outer edge of the structure and approximately twenty to twenty-two feet above the ground level (Tr. 25; Exs. C-1, C-3). Section<span>
					</span>1926.501(b)(1)<span><span></span>
					</span>is therefore applicable to the work being performed by the employee.<span>
					</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">(2) Compliance with the Terms of the Cited Standard</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The record reveals<span>
					</span>Turner Construction failed to provide fall protection in violation of § 1926.501(b)(1). The parties do not dispute the employee was working without fall protection in violation of the standard. CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez testified the employee was working without any fall protection (Tr. 34-35). He further testified there were no guardrail systems, safety nets, or personal fall arrest systems in place while the employee worked near the edge of the structure (Tr. 34-35). The photographs taken by<span>
					</span>CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez support the employee’s lack of any fall protection<span>
					</span>whatsoever (Exs. C-2, C-3, C-4).<span>
					</span><span><span></span>
					</span>The evidence shows Turner Construction’s employee was not utilizing any fall protection while he worked four to six feet from the building’s outside edge and<span><span></span>
					</span>twenty to twenty-two feet above the ground level (Tr. 25, 34-35; Exs. C-1, C-3, C-4).<span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Additionally, while the<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">worker was moving the concrete hose, he was working on a landing approximately one and a half feet wide and eleven feet and five inches</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>high</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>from the next lower<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">concrete<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">surface (Tr. 31, 34;</span><span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Exs. C-6A, C-7).</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">
					</span>Mr. Turner admits his employee should not have been working near the edge without fall protection (Tr. 79). Mr. Turner also admits “the pictures explain themself... if you fall, there’s a great chance that you’ll die” (Tr. 85-86).<span><span></span>
					</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The record is clear, the terms of the standard were violated.<span><span></span>
					</span><span><span></span>
					</span><span><span></span>
					</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">(3) Access to the Violative Condition</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The Secretary bears the burden of proving<span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">whether employee exposure<span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">to the violative condition</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>exists</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Fabricated Metal Products, Inc.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 18 BNA OSHC 1072, 1074 (No. 93-1853, 1997) (citations and footnotes omitted).<span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The Commission has long held the test for hazard exposure requires the Secretary to “show that it is reasonably predictable either by operational necessity or otherwise (including inadvertence), that employees have been, are, or will be in the zone of danger.” </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Delek Ref., Ltd.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 25 BNA OSHC 1365, 1376 (No. 08-1386, 2015) (</span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">citing id.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">).<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">See also Rockwell Intl. Corp.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 9 BNA OSHC 1092 (No. 12470, 1980);<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Gilles & Cotting</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 3 BNA OSHC 2002 (No. 504, 1976).</span><span style="color:#000000; position:relative;font-size:0.58em; bottom: 1ex;font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><a name="ftnref2" href="#ftn2">2</a></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The zone of danger is defined as the “area surrounding the violative condition that presents the danger to employees.”</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Boh Bros. Constr</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. Co., LLC, 24 BNA OSHC 1067, 1085 (No. 09-1072, 2013) (</span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">citing RGM Constr. Co.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 17 BNA OSHC 1229, 1234 (No. 91-2107, 1995)). </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The zone of danger is determined by the hazard presented by the violative condition and is typically the area surrounding the violative condition that presents the danger to employees which the standard is intended to prevent. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">RGM Construction</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, Co., 17 BNA OSHC at 1234;<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Gilles & Cotting, Inc</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">., 3 BNA OSHC<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">at</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>2003.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> The Commission has further held that access to a fall hazard is reasonably predictable where employees are expected to come within twelve feet of an unguarded edge and<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">reasonably believe they are permitted in the unprotected area. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Phoenix Roofing Inc.,</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>17 BNA OSHRC 1076, 1079</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>(No. 90-2148, 1995).</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Turner Construction’s employee was exposed to the hazardous condition while working on the<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">upper level of the structure on the worksite. The record reveals the worker was within four to six feet of the outside edge of the structure and approximately twenty to twenty-two feet from the ground (Tr. 25; Exs. C-1, C-3).</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Additionally, the record shows the worker was exposed to a fall hazard from the inner part of the structure. While the worker was moving the concrete<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">hose,</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>he was</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>working on a landing approximately one and a half feet wide and eleven feet and five inches from the next lower surface (Tr. 31, 34;</span><span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Exs. C-6A, C-7). </span>CSHO Marquez<span>
					</span>testified<span><span></span>
					</span>it would be impossible to work on the landing without fall protection and not be exposed to a<span>
					</span>fall<span>
					</span>hazard (55-56). Turner Construction’s foreman, Moran, admitted the exposed employee could “break bones” if he fell (Tr. 39; Ex. C-8). </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; widows:2; orphans:2; ">The record is clear that<span><span></span>
					</span>the employee was working on the structure’s surface,<span>
					</span>without<span><span></span>
					</span>any form of fall protection,<span>
					</span>safety<span><span></span>
					</span>harness,<span>
					</span>or<span>
					</span>guardrail system in place (Tr. 34-35; Exs. C-1, C-2, C-3, C-6A, C-7). By failing to provide fall protection to an employee working near an unprotected edge which was more than six feet above a lower level, it was reasonably predictable the employee would be in the zone of danger. Therefore, access to the violative condition is established.<span>
					</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">(4) Knowledge of the Violative Conditio</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">n</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Turner Construction’s<span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">knowledge of the violation may be established by showing the employer knew, or with reasonable diligence could have known of the violative condition. </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">29 U.S.C. § 666(k)</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">;<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Nat’l Eng’g & Contracting Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Admin,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">928 F.2d 762, 767 (6th Cir. 1991). An employer’s awareness of the violation may be shown through actual or constructive knowledge of<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">the</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>violation. </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">To</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>establish constructive knowledge, an employer must fail to exercise reasonable diligence in discovering the noncomplying condition. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Precision Concrete Constr.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">19 BNA OSHC 1404, 1407 (No. 99-0707, 2001)</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. Whether an employer was reasonably diligent rests on a variety of factors, “including the employer's obligation to have adequate work rules and training programs, to adequately supervise employees, to anticipate hazards to which employees may be exposed, and to take measures to prevent the occurrence of violations.”<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Precision Concrete Constr.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 19 BNA OSHC at 1407;<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">See Pride Oil Well Serv.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 15 BNA OSHC 1809, 1814 (No. 87-692, 1992). </span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Further, in the Eleventh Circuit, where this case arises,<span>
					</span>“where the Secretary shows a supervisor had either actual or constructive knowledge of the violation, such knowledge is generally imputed to the employer.”<span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">ComTran</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Crp</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">., Inc. v. U. S. Dep’t of Labor</span>, 722 F.3d 1304, 1307-08 (11th<span><span></span>
					</span>Cir. 2013). The<span>
					</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">knowledge of a supervisor is imputed to an employer when the supervisor observers an employee violating a safety rule, knows there is a violation, but nevertheless permits the violative conduct to continue.<span>
						</span></span><span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Quinlan v. Secretary of Labor</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 812 F.3d 832</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">(11th Cir. 2016). </span>An employee who has been delegated authority over another employee, even if only temporarily,<span>
					</span>is considered to be<span><span></span>
					</span>a supervisor for purposes of imputing knowledge to an employer. <span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">American Engineering & Development Corp</span>., 23 BNA OSHC 2093, 2012 (No. 10-0359, 2012);<span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Diamond Installations, Inc</span>., 21 BNA OSHC 1688 (Nos. 02-2080 & 02-2081, 2006);<span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Tampa Shipyards, Inc.</span>, 15 BNA OSHC 1533 (Nos. 86-360 and 86-469, 1992). </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The record shows Turner Construction had actual knowledge through its foreman, Fernando Moran, who had supervisory authority over every employee on the worksite (Tr.<span><span></span>
					</span>35-37, 78). Mr. Turner does not dispute Moran’s supervisory role. He testified Moran was the worksite’s foreman and had supervisory authority and responsibility for the worksite employees (Tr. 78). Moran had directed the employees’ tasks and could stop unsafe work (Tr. 35-36; Ex. C-8). Specifically, Moran had directed the employee to perform the work, of using the concrete pump hose on the upper level, that had exposed the employee to the violative condition (Tr. 37-38; Ex. C-8). Mr. Turner corroborated that Moran had instructed the employees to use the concrete hose on the structure’s upper level (Tr. 76-77). Mr. Turner further testified that the employees had been instructed<span><span></span>
					</span>to bring the concrete hose through the completed stairwell, but instead moved the hose across the tops of the interior walls (Tr. 75-77). Although the employees failed to perform the job in the manner instructed, Moran, who was observing the work, permitted the violative conduct to continue (Tr.<span>
					</span>35-37,<span>
					</span>75-78).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The record shows<span>
					</span>Moran<span><span></span>
					</span>knew the<span>
					</span>employees were engaged in violative conduct which exposed them to a fall hazard<span>
					</span>(Tr.<span>
					</span>35-37, 75-78; Ex. C-8). <span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Actual knowledge is established when a supervisor directly engages in or sees a subordinate’s misconduct.<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">See, e.g., Secretary of Labor v. Kansas Power & Light Co.,</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>5 BNA OSHC 1202, at p.<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">3 (No. 11015, 1977) (holding because the supervisor directly saw the violative conduct without stating any objection, “his knowledge and approval of the work methods employed will be imputed to the respondent”). </span>
				</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Knowledge of the violative condition is established. The Secretary has proven all<span>
					</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">elements of his prima facie case. </span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">Characterization of the Violation</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>The Secretary characterized the violation of<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">the standard found at<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">§</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">1926.501(b)(1)</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">as<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">repeat</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. A repeat violation is committed where both the same standard has been violated more than once and there is substantial similarity of violative elements between the current and prior violations.<span>
						</span></span><span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">29 U.S.C. § 666(a);</span><span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">D & S Grading Co. v. Sec’y of Labor</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 899 F.2d 1145 (11th</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Cir. 1990). </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Further, the prior citation on which the repeat violation is based must have become a final order of the Commission. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Id.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Once substantial similarity has been proven, the burden shifts to the employer to disprove substantial similarity. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">D & S Grading Co. v. Sec’y of Labor</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 899 F.2d 1145 (11th Cir. 1990). </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">On July 18, 2017, OSHA had issued a Citation alleging a serious violation of 29 C.F.R. §1926.501(b)(13) (Ex. C-9). The Citation alleged that on May 13, 2017, an employee of Turner Construction was exposed to a 13-foot fall hazard while working at a worksite in Naples (Ex. C-9). During the inspection, Thomas Turner, Jr., the owner of Turner Construction, was on the worksite and supervising the tasks of his employees (Ex. C-10). The Citation was ultimately resolved through the execution of an informal settlement agreement, which became a final order of the Commission on August 23, 2017 (Tr. 15; Ex. C-11). The parties stipulated Turner Construction had previously been cited for a serious violation of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.501(b)(13)<span><span></span>
					</span>which became a final order of the Commission (Tr. 15; Ex. C-11).<span><span></span>
					</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">CSHO<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Marquez recommended a repeat citation because of the substantially similar violative conditions between the current and prior violation (Tr</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. 51). Both the current and prior violations involved employee exposure to a fall hazard while performing concrete work (Tr. 51). </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>prior violation was<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">cited</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>under 29 C.F.R. § 1926.501(b)(13)</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>because the structure was a residence under construction (Tr. 51; Exs. C-9, C-10). The current violation was<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">cite</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">d</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>under 29 C.F.R. §<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">1926.501(b)(1)</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">because the structure itself, while part of a residential housing project,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">was designated as a storage facility for the complex (Tr. 50-51). The Court finds the differences in the standards are immaterial for purposes of repeat violation characterization. Both standards involve fall hazards and working without fall protection from a structure’s unprotected edge.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The violation w</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">as</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>properly characterized as<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">repeat.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">Employee Misconduct<span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The burden to prove the elements of employee misconduct</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>rests on Turner Construction</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. </span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">To establish the affirmative defense of unpreventable employee misconduct, the employer must prove: "(1) that it has established work rules designed to prevent the violation; (2) that it adequately communicated these rules to its employees; (3) that it has taken steps to discover violations; and (4) that it has effectively enforced the rules when violations have been discovered."<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">P. Gioioso & Sons, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Comm’n</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 115 F.3d 100 (1st Cir. 1997);<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Valdak v. OSHRC</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 73 F.3d 1466 (8th Cir. 1996);<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Precast Servs., Inc.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 17 BNA OSHC 1454, 1455, (No. 93-2971, 1995)<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">aff'd</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 106 F.3d 401 (6th Cir. 1997); </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Hosp. Mgmt., Inc., d/b/a Executive Inn</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, No. 96-1478, 1997 WL 185350 (O.S.H.R.C.A.L.J., Apr. 10, 1997), citing<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Nooter Constr. Co.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 16 BNA OSHC 1572, 1578 (No. 91-237, 1996).<span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span>The record reveals<span>
					</span>Turner Construction<span><span></span>
					</span>did not have, enforce, or effectively communicate any specific rule, designed to prevent the alleged violation. While Mr. Turner testified his employees had taken fall protection classes after the prior violation, he provided no evidence of any<span>
					</span>relevant specific<span><span></span>
					</span>fall protection work rule being communicated to his employees (Tr. 85). Instead,<span>
					</span>the evidence adduced at trial shows no fall protection systems were available at the worksite (Tr. 25, 34-35; Exs. C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4). </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Turner Construction failed to<span><span></span>
					</span>show it effectively enforced any rules<span>
					</span>or disciplined any employee<span>
					</span>when the alleged violation occurred. <span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">A</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">s<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Turner Construction</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>has not met its burden in</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">establish</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">ing</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>any of the elements of the</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>above-mentioned</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>affirmative defense</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, th</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">e</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Court</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">finds<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Turner Construction</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">’s employee misconduct defense fails</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">PENALTY DETERMINATION</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Pursuant to Section 666(j) of the Act, the Commission is granted the authority to assess civil penalties for the violation of citations. 29 U.S.C. § 666(j). In assessing penalties,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">the Act requires due consideration be given to the<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">size of the employer’s business</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, the gravity of the violation, the good faith of the employer, and any prior history of violations. </span><a href="https://1.next.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=L&pubNum=1000546&cite=29USCAS666&originatingDoc=Iec8e1f76fa3811d9bf60c1d57ebc853e&refType=RB&originationContext=document&transitionType=DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.DocLink)#co_pp_267600008f864"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">29 U.S.C. § 666(j)</span></a><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">. </span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">These factors are not necessarily accorded equal weight. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">J.A. Jones Constr.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 15 BNA OSHC 2201, 2216 (No. 87-2059, 1993) (</span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">citation omitted</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">). When applying the penalty assessment factors, the Commission need not accord each one equal weight. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">See, e.g.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Astra Pharm. Prods., Inc.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 10 BNA OSHC 2070, 2071 (No. 78-6247, 1982);<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Orion</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 18 BNA OSHC at 1867 (giving less weight to the<span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">size and history factors). </span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Generally,</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">the gravity of the violation is afforded greater weight in assessing an appropriate penalty. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Trinity Indus.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 15 OSHC 1481, 1483, (1992). A violation’s gravity is determined by weighing the number of employees exposed, the duration of said exposure, preventative measures taken against injury, and the possibility that an injury would occur. </span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">J. A. Jones Constr. Co.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 15 BNA OSHC 2201, 2214 (No. 87-2059, 1993);</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Kus-Tum Builders, Inc.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 10 BNA OSHC 1128, 1132 (No. 76-2644, 1981).</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">CSHO<span>
					</span>Marquez<span>
					</span>testified how the<span>
					</span>penalty<span><span></span>
					</span>for the citation item was<span><span></span>
					</span>calculated and proposed (Tr.<span>
					</span>51-54). He testified a fall from eleven and a half feet onto a concrete surface<span><span></span>
					</span>or a fall<span><span></span>
					</span>from approximately twenty to twenty-two feet high<span>
					</span>to the ground<span>
					</span>would result in permanent disability or death (Tr.<span><span></span>
					</span>51-52) According to the CSHO, he assessed the gravity of the violation as high because of the<span>
					</span>high likelihood the employee could have sustained severe injuries, multiple broken bones, or death from a fall (Tr. 52-53). Probability was assessed as greater because of the amount of time the employee was exposed to the hazard (Tr. 52-53). </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">The Commission frequently relies on the number of employees to evaluate the merits of altering a penalty for size. The Commission has viewed the size factor as “an attempt to avoid destructive penalties” that would unjustly ruin a small business. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Colonial Craft Reprod</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">., 1 BNA OSHC at 1064. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">See also Intercounty Constr. Corp.</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">, 1 BNA OSHC 1437, 1439 (No. 919, 1973),<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">aff'd,</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>522 F.2d 777 (4th Cir. 1975). This concern for small businesses must be tempered with the need to achieve compliance with applicable safety standards. </span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Atlas Roofing Co. v. OSHRC,</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>518 F.2d 990, 1001 (5th Cir.1975) (OSHA penalties are meant to “inflict pocket-book deterrence”),<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-style:italic; color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">aff'd,</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>430 U.S. 442 (1977).</span><span style="color:#000000; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">
					</span>With respect to the size of the business, the CSHO initially recommended a 30% reduction. (Tr.<span>
					</span>53-54). The Court concludes<span>
					</span>considering the small size of this company,<span>
					</span>further reduction<span>
					</span>of the penalty<span>
					</span>based on size is warranted. </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The next statutory consideration, history, examines an employer’s full prior citation history, not just prior citations of the same standard. <span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Orion,</span><span><span></span>
					</span>18 BNA OSHC at 1868;<span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Manganas Painting Co.</span>, 21 BNA OSHC 2043, 2055 (No. 95-0103, 2007) (Consol.) (history includes prior uncontested citations). The penalty was increased by 10% due to Turner Construction’s prior violation history (Tr. 53-54). Additionally, a multiplier was applied to the amount because of the citation’s repeat classification (Tr. 53-54).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The<span><span></span>
					</span>final factor, good faith, entails assessing an employer’s health and safety program, its<span>
					</span>commitment to job safety and health, its cooperation with OSHA, and its efforts to minimize any harm from the violation. <span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Monroe Drywall Constr., Inc</span>., 24 BNA OSHC 1209, 1211 (No. 12-0379, 2013);<span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic; ">Nacirema,</span><span><span></span>
					</span>1 BNA OSHC at 1002. There was no reduction for good faith due to the violation’s repeat classification (Tr. 53-54). </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">For<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">repeat</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>Citation 1, Item 1</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">,</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span>the Secretary proposed, after adjustments,<span>
						</span></span>a penalty of $20,420<span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">00.</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Upon due consideration of section 666 (j) of the Act, with regard given to the enumerated penalty calculation factors,<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">the<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">Court</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span><span></span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">assesses<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">a penalty</span><span><span></span>
					</span>in the amount of $10,210.00.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">The foregoing decision constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:center; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">ORDER</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; margin-left:48px; ">Based upon the foregoing decision, it is ORDERED that:</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; text-indent:1.27cm; ">Item<span>
					</span>1<span><span></span>
					</span>of the Citation, alleging<span><span></span>
					</span>a<span><span></span>
					</span>repeat<span>
					</span>violation of §<span>
					</span>1926.501(b)(1),<span>
					</span>is<span><span></span>
					</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">AFFIRMED</span><span><span></span>
					</span>and<span>
					</span>a penalty in the amount<span><span></span>
					</span>of<span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span><span></span>
						</span>$</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">10,210</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">.00</span><span><span></span>
					</span>is<span>
					</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">ASSESSED</span>.</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-indent:1.27cm; "> </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; line-height:1.5; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; ">SO</span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span><span></span>
						</span>ORDERED.</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; line-height:1.5; text-indent:1.27cm; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span> </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-left:288px; text-indent:1.27cm; widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="text-decoration:underline ;font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline ;">/s/</span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; ">___________________________<span>
						</span></span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>Sharon D. Calhoun</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; ">Dated: September<span>
						</span></span><span style="font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; ">29</span><span style="font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; ">, 2020</span><span style="font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>Administrative Law Judge, OSHRC</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-align:justify; widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; "> Washington, DC</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; line-height:1.5; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span> </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="text-align:justify; widows:2; orphans:2; "><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span></span><span style="font-weight:bold; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; "><span style="mso-tab-count:1">  </span>
					</span></p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p style="line-height:1.5; text-align:justify; "> </p>
			</div>
			<hr/>"
      <div>
				<p>
					<a name="ftn-1" href="#ftnref-1"></a> </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p>
					<a name="ftn0" href="#ftnref0"></a> </p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_FootnoteText style_FootnoteText " style="text-align:justify; ">
					<a name="ftn1" href="#ftnref1"><span class="style_DefaultParagraphFont style_DefaultParagraphFont style_FootnoteReference style_FootnoteReference " style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt; font-size:10pt; ">1 </span></a><span><span></span>
					</span>Prior to OSHA,<span>
					</span>CSHO<span>
					</span>Marquez was<span><span></span>
					</span>a military policeman in the Army for five years and a Kansas City, Missouri police officer for ten years (Tr. 20).<span>
					</span><span><span></span>
					</span>CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez began working for OSHA in 2009 as a compliance officer in Syracuse, New York (Tr. 21-20). Afterwards,<span>
					</span>CSHO<span><span></span>
					</span>Marquez worked as an OSHA compliance officer in the Ft. Lauderdale office for nearly a decade (Tr. 20-21). His duties consist of performing various inspections and investigations on behalf of OSHA (Tr.<span>
					</span>20-21). He has completed over five hundred inspections on OSHA’s behalf (Tr. 21).</p>
			</div>
			<div>
				<p class="style_Normal style_Normal style_FootnoteText style_FootnoteText " style="text-align:justify; ">
					<a name="ftn2" href="#ftnref2"><span class="style_DefaultParagraphFont style_DefaultParagraphFont style_FootnoteReference style_FootnoteReference " style="font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt; font-size:10pt; ">2 </span></a><span><span></span>
					</span>In<span>
					</span><span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt; font-size:10pt; font-style:italic; ">Gilles & Cotting, Inc</span>., the Commission rejected the “actual exposure” test, which required evidence that someone observed the violative conduct, in favor of the concept of “access”, which focuses on the possibility of exposure under the conditions. <span style="font-style:italic; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:11pt; font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt; font-size:10pt; font-style:italic; ">See Gilles & Cotting, Inc</span>., 3 BNA OSHC at 2002 (holding “that a rule of access based on reasonable predictability is more likely to further the purposes of the Act than is a rule requiring proof of actual exposure”). </p>
			</div></div></body>
</html>