Recently, the People's Government of Liwan District, Guangzhou Municipality, released the "Investigation Report on the '2·27' General Collapse Accident at the Poly Dongjiao N Upper Plot Project in Dongjiao, Liwan."

　　At approximately 16:26 on February 27, 2024, at the construction site of the Poly Dongjiao N Upper Plot Project, a financing plot for the Dongjiao urban village redevelopment in Liwan District, Guangzhou Municipality, a temporary slope earthwork collapse and sliding accident occurred inside the foundation pit, causing 2 deaths and direct economic losses of 3.688 million yuan.‍

01. Direct Causes of the Accident

The direct causes of the accident were: earthwork excavation of the foundation pit was not carried out in accordance with the design and the special construction scheme, resulting in the formation of a high and steep temporary slope inside the pit with a hidden danger of collapse; when the excavator was performing slope-lowering and soil-unloading hazard-elimination operations at the top of the slope, the safety distance from the slope edge was insufficient, and excavation was not carried out in balanced layers and sections as required; in addition, the self-weight of the machine and the vibration from construction operations caused the bearing capacity and stability of the slope soil in the work area to drop sharply, placing it in an unstable state, which then led to collapse and sliding; the fill layer, together with the excavator, slid downward into the foundation pit, the excavator's long bucket propped downward against the soil, and the silt layer slope was squeezed and slid, causing the silt to flow and fill the elevator shaft pit-in-pit near the bottom of the slope, burying personnel.

02. Main Problems Existing in the Responsible Units

1. Qun* Earthwork Company (earthwork construction unit)

◆Failed to equip full-time work safety management personnel for the project as required; arranged personnel who had not obtained work safety assessment qualification certificates to serve as project manager and on-site safety management personnel.

◆Failed to carry out earthwork excavation in accordance with the design and special scheme requirements, forming the high and steep temporary slope involved in the incident; organized construction blindly and failed to organize the evacuation of personnel within the affected scope before construction.

2. Dong* Real Estate Development Company (construction unit)

◆Failed to organize and urge the main works general contractor to sign a construction management agreement with the construction units related to the foundation pit works and to incorporate the foundation pit works into general contracting management, resulting in chaotic on-site management, with the earthwork actually not incorporated into general contracting management.

◆Blindly rushed the construction schedule. Ignoring regulatory requirements, it organized all parties after the Spring Festival to resume work and rush work without authorization.

◆Awarded the foundation pit support works and the earthwork works to different construction units.

3. Heng* Construction Company (general contractor)

◆The assigned project manager Li** did not actually perform construction organization and management duties, and arranged an execution manager Yang*, who lacked the corresponding qualifications, to actually be responsible for project construction organization and management; the safety supervisor Li** in the project management structure was actually only arranged to work on the project ** days before the incident and was assigned that day to organize emergency drills; the other two safety officers Jin** and Wang** in the project management structure were also not actually assigned to be responsible for safety management at the construction site; since the start of the project, the company had in fact no full-time work safety management personnel for the project to implement safety management at the construction site.

◆Failed to perform general contracting management duties as required. Failed to implement safety management over the earthwork works as required.

4. Yue* Engineering Management Company (supervision unit)

◆The chief supervisor representative Liu** in the project supervision structure had no corresponding authorization procedures, was actually performing the duties of a professional supervision engineer, and did not possess the qualification certificate for a professional supervision engineer in civil engineering; the two civil engineering professional supervision engineers Liu* and Xiao** in the project supervision structure were actually supervision staff, and Liu*'s supervision staff training certificate had expired on January 29, 2024.

5. Tai* Company (construction unit for foundation pit support works and pile foundation works)

◆The registered project manager did not actually perform duties on the project; failed to equip full-time work safety management personnel for the project, and orally arranged for construction worker Zhou** to concurrently serve as the project safety officer.‍

03. Handling Recommendations for the Responsible Personnel and Responsible Units

(I) Personnel recommended for criminal liability pursued by public security organs (3 persons)

1. Yang**, male, the excavator driver involved, operated in violation of regulations and, when carrying out slope-lowering and soil-unloading operations, failed to implement balanced excavation in layers and sections as required. He bears direct responsibility for the accident and is suspected of a criminal offense; it is recommended that the public security organ pursue his criminal liability in accordance with law.

2. Liu**, male, on-site project supervisor of Qun* Earthwork Company, responsible for work arrangements and construction management of earthwork excavation on site, failed to provide safety technical briefings to operating personnel; when there were construction operations at the bottom of the slope inside the pit and the site had not implemented safety management measures such as safety risk identification, formulation of safe operation plans, and notification of hazardous factors and safe operation requirements, he blindly arranged for Yang Lianghong to lower the slope and unload soil on the temporary slope; he exercised inadequate management over the slope-lowering and soil-unloading operations involved in the incident and failed to promptly investigate and handle safety accident hazards at the construction site. He bears direct management responsibility for the accident and is suspected of a criminal offense; it is recommended that the public security organ pursue his criminal liability in accordance with law.

3. Que**, male, civil engineering engineer of Dong* Real Estate Development Company for the project, on-site person in charge of civil engineering works of the construction unit's project, ignored post-holiday resumption safety regulatory requirements and directed all participating parties to resume work and rush work without authorization; with respect to safety hazards such as on-site earthwork excavation not in accordance with design and special scheme requirements and cross-construction inside the pit before hidden dangers of the temporary slope of the foundation pit were eliminated, he failed to urge all participating parties to implement rectification, disregarded rectification requirements of regulatory authorities and opinions and suggestions raised by participating parties, and took risks in organizing all parties to carry out construction. He bears direct management responsibility for the accident and is suspected of a criminal offense; it is recommended that the public security organ pursue his criminal liability in accordance with law.‍

(II) Administrative penalty recommendations for responsible personnel and responsible units involved in the accident (5 units, 12 persons)

1. Qun* Earthwork Company, the earthwork construction unit of the project involved. It is recommended to impose a fine of not less than 300,000 yuan and not more than 1 million yuan.

2. Liu**, male, legal representative and principal person in charge of Qun* Earthwork Company. It is recommended to impose a fine of 40 percent of his previous year's annual income.

3. Wang**, male, project manager of Qun* Earthwork Company, was not performing duties on site during earthwork excavation and failed to promptly investigate and handle safety accident hazards at the construction site. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

4. Yu**, male, project technician of Qun* Earthwork Company. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

5. Dong* Real Estate Development Company, the construction unit of the project involved. It is recommended to impose a fine of not less than 300,000 yuan and not more than 1 million yuan.

6. Lai**, male, executive general manager (actual person in charge of company operations and management) and project manager of Dong* Real Estate Development Company. It is recommended to impose a fine of 40 percent of his previous year's annual income.

7. Heng* Construction Company, the general contractor of the project involved. It is recommended to impose a fine of not less than 300,000 yuan and not more than 1 million yuan.

8. Chen**, male, president and ** person responsible for work safety of Heng* Construction Company at the time of the incident. It is recommended to impose a fine of 40 percent of his previous year's annual income.

9. Li**, male, registered project manager of Heng* Construction Company, failed to perform project manager management duties. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

10. Yang*, male, project execution manager of Heng* Construction Company, actually performed the duties of project manager. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

11. Yue* Engineering Management Company, the supervision unit of the project involved. It is recommended to impose a fine of not less than 300,000 yuan and not more than 1 million yuan.

12. Song**, male, legal representative and general manager of Yue* Engineering Management Company, and ** person responsible for work safety of the company. It is recommended to impose a fine of 40 percent of his previous year's annual income.

13. Li**, male, chief supervision engineer of Yue* Engineering Management Company for the project, failed to correctly perform his duties and failed to allocate project supervision personnel meeting the requirements. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

14. Liu**, male, professional supervision engineer of Yue* Engineering Management Company for the project. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

15. Tai* Company, the construction unit for the foundation pit support works and pile foundation works of the project involved. It is recommended to impose a fine of not less than 300,000 yuan and not more than 1 million yuan.

16. Wen**, male, registered project manager of Tai* Company, was not on duty performing project manager management duties. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.

17. Zhong*, male, actual project manager of Tai* Company. It is recommended to suspend or revoke his work safety-related qualifications and impose a fine of not less than 20 percent and not more than 50 percent of his previous year's annual income.‍