operation, is not covered by the LHWCA even if some of his duties expose him to the hazards associated with maritime commerce. B. SITUS REQUIREMENT Boomtown contends Decedent does not satisfy the situs requirement of the LHWCA. We agree. The LHWCA provides a recovery if the disability or death results from an injury occurring upon the navigable waters of the United States (including any adjoining pier, wharf, dry dock, terminal, building way, marine railway, or other adjoining area customarily used by an employer in loading, unloading, repairing, dismantling, or building a vessel). 33 U.S.C. § 903(a). Whether an adjoining area is a § 903(a) situs is determined by the nature of the adjoining area at the time of injury. See Nelson v. Guy F. Atkinson Constr. Co., 29 BRBS 39, 41 (1995) (<HOLDING>). At the time of Decedent’s stroke, the
holding that powderman injured while digging a lock on the columbia river did not satisfy the situs element because the site had yet to be used for maritime commerce holding that construction company that carried general work site liability insurance did not control partiallyconstructed home at the time of accident when none of its employees had been at the site for a month holding that because debtor retained control of property a transfer had not yet occurred holding voluntary dismissal permissible because trial court had not yet reached a decision on the merits holding that by including a knowledge element in two sections of a statute the legislature demonstrated that it knew how to express its intent to require a knowledge element rendering the absence of the element in another statute supportive of the inference that the legislature did not intend for there to be a knowledge element