Springfield contractor appeals OSHA citations over collapse

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. -- A contractor is appealing two citations issued after a building collapsed and injured two construction workers.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration fined contractor Morelock-Ross Builders Inc. $3,600 in September, claiming a building that collapsed in April was not designed to support a second-floor concrete slab that was being installed and that the company failed to tell workers to stay out of the building during the concrete pour.

But Morelock-Ross says the fault lies in the building's plans.

"We built the building in accordance with the plans," said company spokesman Jamie Sivils. "We are not allowed to deviate from those plans or do our own engineering. It would be a violation of state law if we did that. We can only build what's on the plans. That building was going to fall no matter what we did."

Sivils said an engineer hired by Morelock-Ross's liability insurance provider also faulted the plans. A report from that engineer said the collapse was a result of "inadequate design for the support of the center bearing wall and header support."

The plans for the building list two Springfield engineers.

Smith-Goth Engineering Inc., which employed one of the engineers, said the firm only handled mechanical and electrical engineering work. Jack Hood, vice president of Hood-Rich Inc., which employed the second engineer, said he doubted the impartiality of the report because the engineering firm that wrote it works for Morelock-Ross's insurance company.

Hood said an engineer hired by his insurance carrier to investigate the collapse didn't find any deficiencies in the plans.

"They felt like they were adequate for the construction," Hood said.

Morelock-Ross is not named in a lawsuit filed in August by William Brack, a construction worker whose leg was broken in the collapse. Defendants in the suit include Hood-Rich, Smith-Goth and local contractors that supplied the steel supports and trusses for the project.

Sivils declined to say why his company is absent from the suit, but said they did not settle with the plaintiffs.

---

Information from: Springfield News-Leader, http://www.springfieldnews-leader.com