Current location - Education and Training Encyclopedia - Educational Knowledge - Case analysis of safety production law
Case analysis of safety production law
After the promulgation of the safety production law, there will always be criminals to test the authority of the law, so there are many cases of the safety production law. The following are some cases I collected for your reference.

Case 1 of Safety Production Law At 7 o'clock on October 201KLOC-0/654381October 25, 2004, at the construction site of Wanda Mansion project, Zhang, a scaffolding worker of Hongji Construction Engineering Services Co., Ltd., broke the safety rope during scaffolding construction, slipped and fell, and Zhang died on the spot. After the accident, the relevant personnel of Hongji Construction Engineering Labor Service Co., Ltd. deliberately concealed the accident.

After investigation by the accident investigation team of Huangdao District Government, it was found that Hongji Construction Engineering Labor Service Co., Ltd. violated the provisions of Article 37 of the Law on Work Safety (2002) and failed to form a strict inspection system for the special labor protection articles used by employees, resulting in the safety ropes used by workers being put into use without being confirmed to be in good condition, and at the same time failing to set a safety net under the scaffolding for demolition work as required. Failure to report the accident according to law after the accident violates the provisions of Article 70 of the Law on Work Safety (2002), which constitutes concealing the accident.

In view of the above-mentioned serious violations, the relevant departments have made the following administrative penalties according to law:

Qingdao Safety Supervision Bureau imposed an administrative penalty of 2 million yuan on Hongji Construction Engineering Labor Service Co., Ltd. according to the Regulations on Reporting, Investigation and Handling of Production Safety Accidents. Impose an administrative penalty of RMB 36,000 on the principal responsible person of Qingdao Hongji Construction Engineering Labor Service Co., Ltd.; The person in charge of Wanda Mansion Project of Hongji Construction Labor Service Co., Ltd. was fined 28,800 yuan.

Huangdao District Urban Construction Bureau has taken rectification measures to completely stop the Wanda Mansion project. Informed criticism, for the investment, general contracting and supervision companies involved in this project, deducted points from the above-mentioned units and related personnel, and cleared the responsible Hongji Construction Engineering Labor Service Co., Ltd. from the construction market.

The above fines have been paid in accordance with the law.

Case 2 of Safety Production Law Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd.? 2? 4? Injury accident case

On February 4th, 20 15, when Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. was carrying out pipeline welding at the east side of China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd. 120 1 tank farm in Huangdao District, the oily sewage well near the welding operation site exploded, and the cement cover plate lifted by the explosion pressure wave killed a worker, resulting in a direct economic loss of about 1 10,000 yuan.

According to the cause and responsibility of the accident confirmed by the accident investigation team of Huangdao District Government, Huangdao District Safety Supervision Bureau has imposed the following administrative penalties on relevant units according to law:

Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. did not organize the construction, did not implement the safety protection measures on the construction site, and did not supervise and inspect the safety hazards of hot work beyond the scope, which violated the provisions of Articles 38 and 41 of the Safety Production Law. According to Item (1) of Article 109 of the Safety Production Law, the company was given an administrative penalty of 250,000 yuan.

China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd. did not strictly approve the use of fire, did not implement safety measures, and did not supervise the safety of outsourcing teams, which violated the provisions of Articles 38, 41 and 45 of the Safety Production Law. According to Item (1) of Article 109 of the Safety Production Law, China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd. was fined RMB 250,000.

Hu, head of the project department of China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd. Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd., failed to supervise and inspect the hidden dangers such as excessive use of fire on the construction site and inadequate implementation of safety protection measures, which violated the provisions of Item (5) of Article 18 of the Safety Production Law. According to Item (1) of Article 92 of the Law on Work Safety, Hu was given an administrative penalty of 30% of his annual income in the previous year, that is, a fine of 10800 yuan.

The above hidden dangers have been rectified and the fine has been paid in full.

Case 3 of Safety Production Law Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd.? 6? 18? Case of object strike accident

20 15, 18 On June 8, when the construction team of Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. dismantled the scaffolding at the construction site of the new sulfur plant of China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd., an object hit accident occurred, resulting in 1 person's death and direct economic loss of about 800,000 yuan.

According to the cause and responsibility of the accident confirmed by the accident investigation team of Huangdao District Government, Huangdao District Safety Supervision Bureau has imposed the following administrative penalties on relevant units according to law:

Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd.' s job site safety management is chaotic, the investigation and management of hidden dangers are not in place, and the responsibilities and monitoring scope of safety supervisors are not clear, which violates Articles 38 and 41 of the Safety Production Law. In the process of dismantling scaffolding, the dense mesh safety net was not used to protect the periphery of scaffolding, which violated Article 3.5. 1 of the Implementation Guide for Safety Inspection Standards for Building Construction (JGJ59-201) and Article 7 of the Construction Plan for Sulfur Recovery and Scaffolding Reconstruction of China Petrochemical Qingdao Refinery and Chemical Co., Ltd., and according to the Safety Production Law,

China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining & Chemical Co., Ltd., as the contractor, failed to perform the safety management, coordination and supervision duties of the contractor Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd., and failed to urge the construction unit Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. to rectify the hidden dangers of accidents that were not protected by dense mesh safety net according to national regulations and program requirements; Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. was not urged to do a good job in site management, and the responsibilities and monitoring scope of safety supervisors were clearly defined. Violation of the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 46 of the Safety Production Law, and an administrative penalty of 250,000 yuan according to the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 109 of the Safety Production Law.

Hu, the project leader of China Petrochemical Qingdao Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd. Beijing Yanhua Engineering Construction Co., Ltd., failed to supervise and inspect the safety production of the project and failed to eliminate the hidden dangers of accidents in time, which violated the provisions of Item 5 of Article 18 of the Safety Production Law. According to the provisions of Item 1 of Article 92 of the Safety Production Law, he was given an administrative penalty of 30% of his income in the previous year, that is, RMB/kloc-0.08 million yuan.

The above hidden dangers have been rectified and the fine has been paid in full.

Case 4 of Safety Production Law Jinan Hengrui Engineering Testing Co., Ltd.? 9? 16? Cases of lifting machinery injury accidents

201April 9 16 At 9: 30 am, a crane accident occurred in Jinan Hengrui Engineering Testing Co., Ltd., the site of Qinggang Group in dongjiakou Circular Economy Zone, Huangdao District, killing two people.

According to the cause and responsibility of the accident confirmed by the accident investigation team, Huangdao District Safety Supervision Bureau made the following administrative penalties according to law:

Qingdao Steel Project Department of Jinan Hengrui Engineering Testing Co., Ltd. contracted out the production and operation projects to Hu individuals who did not have safe production conditions, and no special person was determined to coordinate and manage the on-site construction; Did not urge Liu and other three people to carry out safety education and training, and did not master their post operation procedures; Before the loading and unloading operation, the construction scheme and safety precautions of lifting machinery loading and unloading operation were not organized; Failing to effectively identify the dangers existing in loading and unloading operations. Violation of Articles 41 and 21 of the Law on Work Safety (2002), and an administrative penalty of180,000 yuan in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 37 of the Regulations on Reporting, Investigation and Handling of Work Safety Accidents.

Wang, the deputy general manager of Jinan Hengrui Engineering Testing Co., Ltd. and the main person in charge of the project department of Qinggang, contracted out the production and operation projects to individuals who did not have the conditions for safe production; Failing to supervise and inspect the safety production on the construction site, and promptly eliminating the hidden dangers of production safety accidents; Safety management personnel were not arranged for safety supervision and inspection, and employees were urged to operate in strict accordance with operating procedures, which failed to ensure the effective implementation of safety investment. In violation of the provisions of Item 3 and Item 4 of Article 17 of the Law on Work Safety, an administrative penalty of 30% of the annual income of the previous year, namely RMB 10800, was imposed in accordance with the provisions of Item 1 of Article 38 of the Regulations on Reporting, Investigation and Handling of Work Safety Accidents.

All the above hidden dangers have been rectified and the fine has been paid in full.

Case 5 of Safety Production Law Qingdao Heng Chang Construction Engineering Co., Ltd.? 3? 29? An accident of falling from a height.

2065438+On May 27th, 2005, Huangdao District Safety Supervision Bureau received a report from the masses, which reflected that during the construction work of Qingdao Heng Chang Construction Engineering Co., Ltd. to dismantle the Kangshi branch line in the courtyard 300 meters northeast of the intersection of Renmin Road and Beijing Road in Huangdao District, the staff working on the pole fell from a height, resulting in fracture of the right leg and calf and nasal bone.

According to the investigation of Huangdao District Safety Supervision Bureau, on March 29th, Qingdao Construction Engineering Co., Ltd. contracted the 10KV Jiawangdun line iron tower project from Qingdao Huineng Electric Power Co., Ltd. During the construction of the Kangshi branch line project in the 300-meter courtyard at the intersection of Renmin Road and Beijing Road, due to the sudden collapse of the telephone pole, the employee Wang, who was working on the telephone pole, fell from a height, resulting in his right leg and nose fracture, which was diagnosed as serious injury by the Second People's Hospital of Huangdao District. However, Wang went to work without special job safety education and training.

Qingdao Heng Chang Construction Engineering Co., Ltd. violated the provisions of Article 13 of the Regulations on Safety in Production in Shandong Province. According to the first paragraph of Article 48 of the Regulations on Work Safety in Shandong Province, Huangdao District Safety Supervision Bureau ordered the company to make corrections within a time limit and imposed an administrative penalty of RMB 15000. The company has completely rectified as required and paid the fine in full.

Qingdao pingdu city Minghua Construction and Installation Co., Ltd. Sanheshan Iron Mine Safety Production Law Case 6? 8? 2? Promote transportation accident cases

On August 2, 2065438, at about 19, the inclined shaft hoist of Sanheshan Iron Mine of pingdu city Minghua Construction and Installation Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Sanheshan Iron Mine) lifted a mine car gangue (weighing about 1 ton) to 180 meters, and the wire rope suddenly broke, causing the mine car that lost traction to quickly slide down and derail, and Li who was walking on the sidewalk of the roadway.

According to the cause and responsibility of the accident confirmed by the accident investigation team of pingdu city Municipal Government, pingdu city Administration of Work Safety made the following administrative penalties according to law:

Sanheshan Iron Mine contracted out the construction project of inclined shaft and roadway in No.2 mining area to unqualified individuals for illegal construction, ignored the instruction of suspension of production and rectification issued by the safety supervision department, failed to rectify the major safety hazards existing in hoists and other equipment, and resumed work illegally without applying for acceptance, which led to accidents. With the approval of pingdu city Municipal People's Government, pingdu city Safety Supervision Bureau issued a written opinion on the closure and restoration of Sanheshan Iron Mine of Qingdao pingdu city Minghua Construction and Installation Co., Ltd. according to law.

Yanmou of Sanheshan Iron Mine is responsible for the construction of inclined shaft in 2# mining area, and in violation of the provisions of Article 46 of the Safety Production Law, illegally contracts the construction of inclined shaft in 2# mining area to unqualified individuals; Failing to carry out the hidden danger rectification instruction issued by the safety supervision department and the statutory instruction to stop mine construction, and illegally organizing construction without approval; Violation of safety regulations for metallic and nonmetallic mines (GB 16423? In 2006), the hoist wire rope was not tested and inspected, and the wire rope was seriously worn and broken, and it was not replaced in time; There is no stopping device in the inclined shaft, no operation warning below the lifting operation, and no special person to supervise; Be primarily responsible for the accident. The judicial department shall investigate its responsibility according to law. According to Article 40 of the Regulations on the Reporting, Investigation and Handling of Production Safety Accidents (Order No.493 of the State Council), he shall not be the main person in charge of any production and business operation entity within five years after the execution of the penalty.