Opinion ID: 2518040
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: the accident and investigation

Text: ¶ 2 In August 2003, Skyline performed electrical work on a light fixture in a UPS mobile distribution unit. Skyline's work was fatally defective. Skyline failed to ground the fixture, creating a life-threatening hot electrical environment within the trailer. Four days later, at about 4:20 a.m., UPS employee Mark Hills reached for a fallen package and completed the electric circuit. He was electrocuted. ¶ 3 UPS mounted an immediate investigation of Mark Hills' death. UPS summoned Skyline personnel to the scene of the accident at about 6:15 a.m. UPS instructed Skyline to disassemble an electrical j-box that appeared to be the source of the problem. During this process, a plastic wall anchor piece disappeared. ¶ 4 Approximately three hours later, UPS contacted the Utah Occupational and Safety Health Division of the Labor Commission (UOSH). The UOSH compliance officer who came to the scene noted that it had already been altered. As a result, he was unable to ascertain the cause of Mark Hills' electrocution. The compliance officer instructed UPS to seal the scene from any further contact or activity until authorized by UOSH. ¶ 5 The next morning, UPS's workers' compensation insurance carrier, Liberty Mutual, hired an electrical contractor to investigate the scene. When the UOSH compliance officer returned to the scene that afternoon, he recognized that despite his instructions, the scene had been altered yet again. As a result, UOSH fined UPS $71,700. When UPS contested the citation, the compliance officer reduced the fine to $6,000 and reclassified the citation from willful to serious. The officer reasoned that although the plastic anchor pertaining to the cause of the accident was removed or destroyed while under the control of UPS, the situation was mitigated because UPS provided photographs of the plastic wall anchor taken shortly after the accident occurred.