First, describe the work and worksite
A glazing crew removes one intact fixed, factory-glazed window and its surrounding frame from a surveyed ground-story opening. The existing fixing arrangement and removal method are identified; the crew will support the complete assembly and leave a protected opening for a separately planned replacement. This fictional learning example describes planned controls; it records no actual inspection or work authorization.
- Partial replacement and existing-removal coverage: the entire fixed window frame is removed; no broken-pane extraction, new-unit installation or structural wall repair.
- The preparatory survey releases surrounding materials, services and wall stability; hazardous coatings or sealants have been assessed before disturbance.
- The selected unit can be removed intact using the accepted support and handling method; unexpected construction stops the planned sequence.
Questions before work
- What keeps this whole unit supported when trim or the first retaining fastener is released?
- Which survey findings and hidden-service checks allow perimeter materials to be disturbed?
- Who accepts the exposed opening and its temporary weather and access protection after removal?
Build the analysis one step at a time
What will the worker do? How could someone be harmed? What prevents or reduces that exposure? Who checks the control, and when?
1. Release the surveyed removal scope
Hazard: Unidentified materials, hidden services or supporting-wall defects can expose the crew or change the load path.
Control: Review the preparatory survey and exact frame construction. Confirm hazardous-material disposition, service clearance, intact glass condition and the authorized boundary; stop if these are unresolved.
Verification: Lead records survey release, window identity and the approved removal and support method.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Removing an old window may disturb hazards that were absent from the new-unit installation example.
2. Close the area and support the assembly
Hazard: The unit may fall as trim is loosened, striking workers or people on the other side.
Control: Close both sides of the opening and clear the removal route. Fit the accepted temporary support before disturbing any potentially retaining trim; position the handling aid and stable receiving rack.
Verification: Crew verifies support engagement and receiving capacity while the frame remains fixed in the wall.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Some assemblies lose retention when trim is removed, before the obvious frame fixings are reached.
3. Expose the identified fixing points
Hazard: Sharp trim, nails and sealant cutting can injure hands or damage surrounding weather layers.
Control: Work from stable ground positions using controlled hand tools and task-appropriate cut protection. Remove only the released perimeter materials, collect sharp pieces and verify each exposed fixing against the planned construction.
Verification: Installer confirms the actual fixing arrangement matches the plan before any final attachment is released.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The support sequence must follow the construction found, rather than a guessed fastener pattern.
4. Release attachments while maintaining support
Hazard: Sudden separation or a trapped frame can pinch hands, tip the unit or break the glass.
Control: Release the identified attachments in the accepted sequence with the unit continuously supported. Keep hands outside the gap and communicate each release; do not force a unit restrained by an unknown connection.
Verification: Lead checks load transfer to the handling system before approving the final release from the wall.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A frame that moves slightly may still be connected and can spring when the remaining attachment lets go.
5. Move the intact unit to its receiving rack
Hazard: An awkward complete assembly can twist, strike an edge or exceed safe manual-handling capability.
Control: Move on the agreed commands using the selected handling aid and clear route. Maintain frame support and control until the unit is secured on the rack; segregate any damaged assembly for a revised removal plan.
Verification: Handler verifies stable rack restraint, glass condition and the absence of loose sharp components.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A whole frame needs a receiving arrangement suited to its actual shape and remaining glazing.
6. Protect and hand over the empty opening
Hazard: Exposed fixings, a ground-level opening or unrecorded deterioration can endanger occupants and the next installer.
Control: Remove authorized sharp debris, inspect the exposed opening and record deterioration. Install accepted temporary access and weather protection without disguising unresolved structural or hazardous-material findings.
Verification: Supervisor records opening condition, temporary protection and the separate replacement-work release still required.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Successful removal does not establish that the opening is ready to receive a new assembly.
What does a useful control look like?
| Needs improvement | More useful for this scenario |
|---|---|
| Work carefully and wear PPE. | Work from stable ground positions using controlled hand tools and task-appropriate cut protection. Remove only the released perimeter materials, collect sharp pieces and verify each exposed fixing against the planned construction. |
| Check that everything is ready. | Review the preparatory survey and exact frame construction. Confirm hazardous-material disposition, service clearance, intact glass condition and the authorized boundary; stop if these are unresolved. |
Decisions that change the analysis
Why is this separate from broken-glass removal?
The broken-glass example removes damaged glazing from a retained frame. Here the intact frame and glazing leave the wall together, so progressive frame retention and the condition of the exposed building opening control the sequence.
What must the crew record for actual use?
Identify the actual equipment and work boundaries, responsible people, applicable criteria, inspection findings and open actions. Resolve changes with affected crews and obtain required project authorization before work.
Agree when the crew will pause
- Pause for an unidentified material, concealed service, wall movement, damaged glass or an unsupported frame.
- Replan when fixings cannot be reached by the approved method, the frame binds or the receiving arrangement changes.
- Elevated removal, deliberate pane breakage, sash dismantling or structural opening repair requires another scope.
After a pause, correct the condition, reassess the work, and obtain required authorization before restarting. Keep unresolved actions visible.
Download the worked example and free template
No account required. The worked example contains planned controls. The blank template is for your own work; neither includes fabricated inspection results, signatures or approval.
Your editable working copy
Build and download your draft
Start blank or load the learning example. Replace its assumptions with your actual conditions and involve the people doing the work. Your entries stay in this browser tab; download a copy before leaving or refreshing.
1. Describe your work and site
2. Work through each task
Describe an observable step, how someone could be harmed, and the control that acts on that hazard. Identify who checks it and what evidence is needed.
3. Record changes, checks, and open actions
Walk the work area, review with the crew, and resolve missing controls. Follow the required approval process. This tool does not judge completeness, verify signatures or authorize work.
Open the downloaded file in a browser, then use Print → Save as PDF for a printable copy.
Training needs to confirm
- Train the crew to interpret the preparatory survey and stop when hidden construction, hazardous materials or services differ from the release.
- Practice continuous whole-frame support, progressive attachment release and the actual receiving-rack handoff.
Confirm applicable qualifications, task instruction and actual training evidence for the people assigned. Related toolbox talks support toolbox talks; they do not establish competence.
Common questions
Can this example be used as a JSA?
Adapt its Task | Hazard | Control analysis to the employer’s format and actual conditions. The example is a teaching aid, not evidence that controls were checked.
What changes if the project requires an AHA?
Use the governing AHA format, risk method, supporting records and acceptance process. The published formwork AHA demonstrates that additional structure; changing a JHA title does not supply it.
Are these resources part of a paid course?
This walkthrough, browser draft builder and downloads are free public resources, separate from Academy course enrollment.
References and source note
- Pella Full-frame window removal and replacement instructions, revised April 2026
- OSHA 1926.850 Demolition preparatory operations
- OSHA 1926.21 Safety training and education
- OSHA 1926.300 Hand and power tools
- OSHA 1926.102 Eye and face protection
Original instructional scenario with planned controls. Primary references support hazard planning. Use actual equipment and product instructions, project design and employer requirements to establish field criteria. This example supplies no inspection findings or work authorization. Use actual equipment instructions and site requirements alongside these references. Reference review: October 9, 2026.