OSHA citations are costly. “Repeat” OSHA citations are even more expensive, and may set the stage for future willful violations. Repeat citations are assessed when enforcement officials look back at the employer’s history and find citations for substantially similar conditions or hazards. Historically, repeat citations have been assessed based upon a generally agreed-upon “look back” period provided in OSHA’s Field Operations Manual (“Manual”), the instruction manual used by OSHA enforcement officials that details policies and procedures for OSHA enforcement that helps ensure uniformity amongst enforcement officials. Prior to 2015, the Manual provided for a three-year look back period. The look back period was extended to five years in 2015.
But this February a New York court, in the case of Triumph Construction v. Secretary of Labor, held that this “look back” period is not binding. In other words, enforcement officials can “look back” further in time than the “look back” period that is suggested by the Manual when determining whether to issue a repeat citation. This ruling provides enforcement officials with potentially unlimited look back ability.
In this case, Triumph was the general contractor on a water main replacement project in lower Manhattan. One of Triumph’s employees was injured in a cave-in at one of the project excavation sites in August, 2014. Later, in 2015, OSHA issued a citation to Triumph for a repeat violation of the OSHA regulation that requires a cave-in protection system for all excavations five feet in depth or more. OSHA classified the citation as a repeat violation based on two previous citations Triumph received for violating the same regulation in 2009 and again in 2011.
Triumph contested the repeat violation, relying upon OSHA’s stated policy in 2014 of using a three-year look back period. In support of its argument Triumph pointed the court to the Manual. The court concluded that OSHA had not abused its discretion by relying on previous violations more than three years old because there is nothing in OSHA law that strictly limits the look back period to three years. The Court noted that the Manual states that the three-year period shall “generally” be followed and further stated that the Manual is “only a guide for OSHA personnel to promote efficiency, is not binding on OSHA . . . and does not create any substantive rights for employers.”
In Virginia, the Virginia Occupational Safety and Health Field Operations Manual ("Virginia Manual") sets forth a three-year look back period. Under the Virginia Manual, repeat citations may be issued if the citation is issued within three years of the final order or the final abatement date of the previous citation. While it is unclear whether VOSH or a Virginia state court would strictly apply the three-year look back period, a Virginia state court judge might take a cue from the New York federal court and allow repeat violations based on a longer look back period.
The lesson to be learned for contractors and employers with a history of violations is that generally-suggested look-back periods found in field operations manuals and other non-binding guidelines may not necessarily protect you from being subjected to costly citations for repeat violations. Your construction lawyer can assist with determining whether to request an informal conference or to contest a citation and can also assist with assessing your chances of having citations dismissed and decreasing the risk of costlier repeat violations.
Want to dive deeper into the topics covered in this post?
When the OSHA Inspector Comes Knocking
An OSHA Inspector Just Arrived On Your Job Site. Now What?
What To Do After an OSHA Inspection
As president of Hirschler and head of the firm's litigation section, Courtney knows how to lead people and projects to a successful outcome.
Leveraging deep experience in the construction industry, Courtney advises public and ...
Kelly’s practice focuses on construction law, commercial and product liability law, with an emphasis on dispute resolution—including mediation, arbitration, jury and bench trials in state and federal court. She routinely ...
Nate fully engages in each case and shoulders his clients’ needs. Communication, efficiency and careful judgment define his practice. In every case, he investigates competing claims to thoroughly understand their strengths ...
A professional engineer (P.E.) and an experienced lawyer, Webb began practicing at Hirschler Fleischer following four years of work as a consulting engineer. His multidisciplinary practice focuses on general business and ...
SubscribeSubscribe to Hirschler by Email
- Kelly Bundy and Liz Burneson Publish Article on Joint Employer Status in Construction Executive
- Kelly Bundy Authors Article for ABA Construction Law Forum’s “Under Construction” Series
- Miller Act Notice More Than 90 Days Before A Subcontractor’s Final Day of Work Held Untimely
- Virginia Supreme Court Allows Sub-Sub Material Supplier To Recover Directly From General Contractor For Unpaid Material
- New Virginia Law Can Make General Contractors Liable for Subcontractors' Employee Wages
- OSHA Changes Course on COVID-19 Record-Keeping Requirements
- New OSHA Guidance Suspends Enforcement of Record-Keeping Requirements for COVID-19 Cases in Most Industries
- What the Virginia Temporary Stay at Home Order Means for Your Business
- Ten Tips For Addressing Coronavirus Concerns In Your Workplace
- Closure of “Non-Essential Businesses” and “Stay at Home” Orders: What Do These Mean for the Construction Industry?
- COVID-19, Coronavirus Outbreak
- Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)
- Little Miller Act
- Miller Act
- Dispute Resolution
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Government Contracts
- Workforce Development
- Mechanic's Liens
- Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR)
- Joint Checks
- Unjust Enrichment
- Virginia Employment Commission (VEC)
- Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission
- Uniform Statewide Building Code
- Change Orders
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019
- August 2019
- June 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016