The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has released informal draft regulations to make safer consumer products widespread in California. The regulations provide more protection against toxic chemicals in products on store shelves, while creating market opportunities for industry. The regulations called for in California’s Green Chemistry Initiative will create a practical, meaningful, and legally defensible approach to identifying and moving toward safer consumer products. Using a science-based process during a product’s design phase, they require the identification of toxic ingredients and the analysis of alternatives to that ingredient. Based on the results of the analysis a number of steps can be taken, including removal of the toxic ingredient, posting product information for consumers, further research and development, and safety measures.
The informal draft Safer Consumer Products Regulations reflect more than two years of outreach to a variety of stakeholders and the public, and is a vital component of California’s 2008 Green Chemistry Initiative. Following this informal public comment period, DTSC will develop formal proposed regulations next year and solicit further input prior to adopting a final version. “Californians should not need a Ph. D. to go shopping,” said DTSC Director Debbie Raphael. “They should feel confident as they walk the aisles of any store that products on the shelves are safe to use and free of toxic chemicals. We want manufacturers to ask: Is it necessary to use a toxic chemical in their consumer product, or is there a safer alternative?” “Many people assume that because a product is legal to sell, it’s safe to use,” Raphael said. “and more, there’s an understanding that some of the health and environmental problems we see in the world today may, in fact, stem from toxic chemicals in consumer products. A number of other countries are already taking action, but our Green Chemistry Initiative puts California at the forefront.”
She pointed out that many of the concepts DTSC put in the regulations are already in use by companies that are making safer products and finding a large market among consumers. “Companies are finding new revenue opportunities as shoppers look for products they don’t have to worry about,” said Raphael. “Early adopters, such as Apple, Green Toys, California Baby, Method and others that have been first to meet this demand, are proving it’s a profitable business strategy.”
Raphael said the regulations aim to stimulate a new alternatives analysis economy and create opportunities for young chemists and product designers who consider safety to humans and the environment on the same level as performance and efficiency. A proposed set of regulations was introduced in 2010, but additional time was required to refine the concepts in that proposal. The version released greatly shortens timeframes, immediately establishes a list of chemicals of concern, and stimulates a change in the way products are created by incorporating impacts to health and the environment into the design phase.
The regulations will be discussed by DTSC’s Green Ribbon Science Panel on November 14–15 in Sacramento. (The 25-member panel consists of leading scientists who provide advice to DTSC on scientific matters and chemical policy). Assembly Bill 1879 and Senate Bill 509, two laws that are part of California’s Green Chemistry Program, were signed into law in 2008. These laws authorize DTSC to develop an alternatives analysis framework to stimulate the rapid acceleration of replacement of harmful chemicals and ingredients with safer alternatives in products sold in California.
How to Author GHS Safety Data Sheets
OSHA is adopting the new Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for the classification and labeling of hazardous chemicals. A cornerstone of GHS is the adoption of a completely revised Safety Data Sheet (SDS).
- December 15, 2011
- January 27, 2012
- February 29, 2012
How to Label Hazardous Chemicals Using OSHA’s New GHS Hazcom Standard
Workplace and supplier hazard communication labels are being reinvented as OSHA adopts the new Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for labeling hazardous chemicals.
- December 16, 2011
- February 3, 2012
- March 1, 2012
How to Prepare for OSHA Adoption of the GHS for Classification and Labeling of Chemicals
. This means that virtually every product label, material safety data sheet (soon to be called “safety data sheet”), and written hazard communication plan must be revised to meet the new standard. Worker training must be updated so that workers can recognize and understand the symbols and pictograms on the new labels as well as the new hazard statements and precautions on MSDSs.
Environmental Resource Center is offering webcast training courses where you will learn how the new rule differs from current requirements, how to implement the changes, and when the changes must be implemented.
- December 12, 2011
- January 20, 2012
- February 28, 2012
Register early to ensure your spot in one of the upcoming sessions. You may register online or call 800-537-2372 to register by phone.
Charlotte, North Carolina RCRA and DOT Training
Cary, North Carolina 40-Hour and 24-Hour HAZWOPER Training
Wilmington, Delaware RCRA and DOT Training
Safety Consultant/Trainer
Environmental Resource Center has a new opening for a safety consultant and auditor. We are looking for a former OSHA CSHO, OSHA trainer, or state inspector for this position in our Cary, North Carolina, office. Applicants should have excellent writing and speaking skills and be willing to travel 7–14 days per month. We are looking for an expert in all of the General Industry and Construction standards who is capable of performing audits of industrial facilities as well as conducting on-site training.
Strong consideration will be given to applicants who also have experience providing HAZWOPER, Hazcom, lockout/tagout, confined spaces, and machine guarding training.
The position includes maintenance of training materials (books and presentations), working on consulting projects, development of classes and computer-based training programs, and ensuring customer satisfaction.
New Material for Air Cleaner Filters Captures Flu Viruses
With flu season just around the corner, scientists are reporting development of a new material for the fiber in face masks, air conditioning filters, and air cleaning filters that captures influenza viruses before they can get into people’s eyes, noses, and mouths and cause infection. The report on the fiber appears in ACS’ journal Biomacromolecules.
Xuebing Li, Peixing Wu, and colleagues explain that in an average year, influenza kills almost 300,000 people and sickens millions more worldwide. The constant emergence of new strains of virus that shrug off vaccines and anti-influenza medications has led to an urgent need for new ways of battling this modern-day scourge. So Li, Wu, and colleagues sought a new approach, using a substance termed chitosan made from ground shrimp shells.
The scientists combined chitosan with substances that the flu virus attaches to in order to infect cells. They found that this new version of chitosan ideal for attaching to fibers of face masks and air filters was highly effective in capturing flu virus. The material could become an important addition to vaccinations, anti-influenza medications, and other measures in battling flu, they suggest.
Bathtub Refinishing Hazard Alert
Certain coating removers containing methylene chloride are widely used in the bathtub refinishing industry to prepare tubs for a new finish. Since 2006 there have been three deaths in Michigan in this industry involving methylene chloride.
The program determines the underlying causes of the work-related fatalities, and formulates and disseminates prevention strategies to reduce them. MIOSHA’s goal is to help prevent workplace injuries, illnesses, and fatalities and to ensure that effective tools and training are available to employers and employees.
The MIOSHA Consultation Education and Training (CET) Division has consultants available to provide assistance with evaluating methylene chloride exposure. The assistance provided by CET is at no cost to the employer and will not result in the issuance of any citations or penalties.
Free Permit Required Confined Space Safety Training
Working in “permit required confined spaces” such as an underground vault, tank, storage facility, or silo carries a great risk to workers and the public. Unless workers are properly trained in assessing potential health and safety hazards, injuries can result and lives could be lost.
Catherine Zinsser, Occupational Safety Training Specialist in the Connecticut Department of Labor’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health, will lead a November 22 training session covering the “Permit Required Confined Space Safety” topic. The free session will run from 10:00 a.m. through noon at the Department of Labor’s Central Office – 200 Folly Brook Boulevard, Wethersfield, Connecticut.
“There are permit required confined spaces in many building locations and workers should exercise great caution to keep everyone safe,” Zinsser explains. “The ability to identify potential problems that may pose entrapment hazards for entrants or restrict air circulation is a ‘must have’ for worker safety and protection.” Participants will also learn the basic federal requirements and procedures described in 29 CFR 1910.146, Permit‐Required Confined Spaces.
Admission to the Permit Required Confined Space Safety session is free; however, preregistration is required.
Evidence Inconclusive About Long-Term Health Effects of Exposure to Military Burn Pits
Insufficient data on service members’ exposures to emissions from open-air burn pits for trash on military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan is one of the reasons why it is not possible to say whether these emissions could cause long-term health effects, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine. High background levels of ambient pollution from other sources and lack of information on the quantities and composition of wastes burned in the pits also complicate interpretation of the data.
During deployment to a war zone, military personnel can be exposed to a variety of environmental hazards, many of which have been associated with long-term adverse health outcomes such as cancer and respiratory disease. Many veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan have health problems that they worry are related to their exposure to burn pits on military bases. Special attention has been focused on the burn pit at Joint Base Balad (JBB), one of the largest US military bases in Iraq and a central logistics hub.
Based on its analysis of raw data from air monitoring efforts at JBB conducted by the US Department of Defense, the committee that wrote the report concluded that levels of most pollutants of concern at the base were not higher than levels measured at other polluted sites worldwide. Moreover, research on other populations exposed to complex mixtures of pollutants, primarily firefighters and workers at municipal waste incineration plants, has not indicated increased risk for long-term health consequences such as cancer, heart disease, and most respiratory illnesses among these groups.
Even so, the committee pointed out shortcomings in research and gaps in evidence that prevented them from drawing firm conclusions, and it recommended a path to overcome some of these limitations. Lack of information on the specific quantities and types of wastes burned and on other sources of background pollution when air samples were being collected meant it was difficult to correlate pit emissions, including smoke events, with potential health outcomes. Different types of wastes produce different combinations of chemical emissions with the possibility of different health outcomes in those exposed. Moreover, it is hard to determine whether surrogate populations such as firefighters experience exposures to pollutants and durations of exposures similar to those of service members stationed at JBB.
The report recommends that a study be conducted to evaluate the health status of service members from their time of deployment to JBB over many years to determine their incidence of chronic diseases, including cancers, that tend not to show up for decades. In addition, it recommends a tiered approach to gathering data to better characterize exposures to the complex mixture of burn pit emissions in light of the presence of other sources of pollutants in the ambient environment.
Given the variety of hazards and substances to which military personnel are exposed in the field, service in Iraq and Afghanistan in general—rather than exposure to burn pits only—might be associated with long-term health effects, the committee noted. A specific concern is the high ambient concentrations of particulate matter generated by both human activities and natural sources. Risks may be greater for those who are especially susceptible to health problems, including individuals with asthma or those who encountered high concentrations of substances or had prolonged exposures.
The study was sponsored by the US Department of Veterans Affairs. Established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine provides independent, objective, evidence-based advice to policymakers, health professionals, the private sector, and the public. The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies.
Pet Food Company Fined $750,000 for 23 Health and Safety Violations
OSHA has cited All-Feed Processing & Packaging Inc., headquartered in Alpha, Illinois, for 23 safety and health violations at its pet food production and packaging facility in Galva, Illinois, including willful violations of OSHA’s air contaminant, respiratory protection, and hearing conservation standards. Some violations were cited under OSHA’s general duty clause, including failing to provide appropriate fire and explosion protection in locations where concentrations of combustible dust existed. Proposed fines total $758,450.
“Even after a powerful dust explosion and fire at this facility in 2009, along with a number of citations previously issued for similar conditions, All-Feed Processing & Packaging fails to comply with safety and health requirements,” said OSHA Assistant Secretary Dr. David Michaels. “By showing a blatant disregard for worker safety and health, this employer continues to expose workers to deadly hazards.”
OSHA issued nine per-instance willful citations for failing to mandate the use of respirators for six workers exposed to dust in excess of the permissible exposure limits; and failing to protect three dust collection units, which collect combustible dust such as starch, potato base, cellulose fiber, and pea protein, from fire and explosion hazards.
Additionally, four single-instance willful citations were issued for requiring employees to work in areas where they were exposed to total dust in excess of permissible limits, together with failing to implement adequate engineering controls when employees were so exposed; failing to administer a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for employees exposed to excessive noise; failing to ensure the safe use, wiring and installation of equipment in hazardous locations; and allowing the use of liquid propane-powered industrial trucks in atmospheres where combustible dust may be ignited. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health. Proposed fines for the 13 willful violations total $700,700.
Three repeat safety violations were cited for failing to ensure that operators of powered industrial trucks had completed training and were evaluated on their skills, have the load rating affixed to lifting devices, and posting danger signs to warn exposed employees of potential dangers posed by work spaces involving hazardous conditions. One repeat health violation was cited for failing to post safety instruction signs indicating the presence of combustible dust. A repeat violation exists when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years. The company was cited for similar hazards in 2009. Proposed fines for the four repeat violations total $50,050.
One serious safety violation, with a proposed fine of $3,850, was cited for failing to have a written certification indicating that all hazards in the permit-required confined space had been eliminated. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazardous condition about which the employer knew or should have known.
All-Feed Processing & Packaging also was cited for five other-than-serious violations, with proposed fines of $3,850, for failing to record work-related injuries and illness as required on the OSHA 300 log. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.
Prior to this inspection, which was opened in May after OSHA procured a warrant to conduct the inspection, All-Feed Processing & Packaging had been inspected by OSHA 10 times since 2000, resulting in citations and significant proposed penalties on five occasions. Those citations encompassed a total of 17 willful, 44 serious, five repeat, and 10 other-than-serious violations, many of which related to failing to monitor and limit employees’ exposure to hazardous dust.
The workers’ compensation carrier insuring All-Feed Processing & Packaging is Benchmark Insurance Co., in Shawnee Mission, Kansas. Workers’ compensation is a form of insurance that provides wage replacement and medical benefits for an employee who has a job-related injury or disease, in exchange for relinquishment of the employee’s right to sue his or her employer for negligence. Each state has its own workers’ compensation law. Illinois’ law first took effect in 1912 and requires employers to provide workers’ compensation insurance for almost every person who is hired, injured, or whose employment is localized in Illinois.
The company has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which focuses enforcement resources on employers with a history of safety violations that endanger workers by demonstrating indifference to their responsibilities under the law. The program includes mandatory OSHA follow-up inspections, and inspections of other work sites of the same employer where similar hazards and deficiencies may be present. All-Feed Processing & Packaging was placed in the program due to its previous violations as well as the per-instance violations cited during both the current and a January 2011 inspection.
“Employers have a responsibility to provide appropriate safety equipment and training to protect workers from respiratory hazards, and to ensure that workplaces are safe and healthful,” said Dr. Michaels.
The citations can be viewed at
OSHA Cites M-Power Chemicals for Respiratory, Combustible Dust and Other Hazards
OSHA cited M-Power Chemicals LC in Brookshire, Texas, for 14 serious and two other-than-serious violations, including exposing employees to respiratory and combustible dust hazards. Proposed penalties total $54,600.
“This company jeopardized the safety and health of its workers by exposing them to respiratory and combustible dust hazards,” said David Doucet, director of OSHA’s Houston North Area Office. “Long-term exposure to dust can lead to disabling illnesses.” OSHA’s Houston North Area Office conducted its inspection at the company’s facility on Farm to Market 529 where workers handle various powders and liquids in the production of lubricating agents to improve flow in pipelines.
The serious violations involve failing to adequately control combustible dust; failing to use noncombustible ventilation ducts; failing to electrically ground bulk container bags while being emptied; failing to keep work and storage areas clean of combustible dust; failing to develop, implement, and train employees in a respiratory protection program; failing to medically evaluate and fit-test employees for respiratory protection; and failing to provide warning signs to alert employees of the hazards of combustible dust.
The other-than-serious violations involve failing to use the proper filter cartridge on respirators and failing to list hazardous chemicals used in the workplace.
Construction Companies Fined $280,000 for Willful and Serious Asbestos Violations
OSHA cited two Chicago companies, T2 G.C. LLC, which operates as T2 Construction, and Gramek Construction Inc., for failing to protect workers from asbestos hazards at a job site in May. T2 Construction faces proposed fines of $141,600 and Gramek Construction faces proposed fines of $138,600, for a combined total of $280,200.
T2 Construction was the general contractor at a Chicago job site, which involved a 90-year-old, 80,000-square-foot building. T2 oversaw the activities of demolition contractor Gramek Construction, including the removal of floor tile and pipe insulation that allegedly contained asbestos.
“Failing to conduct an asbestos assessment and require workers to wear personal protective equipment when working with material potentially contaminated by asbestos shows a blatant disregard for their health and safety,” said OSHA Regional Administrator Michael Connors in Chicago. “Safe and healthful working conditions should be paramount on every job site, and OSHA is committed to protecting workers, especially when employers fail to do so.”
T2 Construction was cited for two willful health violations including failing to have a competent person conduct an initial assessment prior to commencing Class I and Class II asbestos work, and failing to ensure compliance with the asbestos standard as the general contractor.
Additionally, T2 Construction was cited for 14 serious violations involving asbestos control procedures, such as failing to conduct air and exposure monitoring, failing to follow specific engineering controls and practices, failing to remove tile intact, allowing dry sweeping of dust and residue, failing to provide hygiene facilities for workers conducting asbestos removal and failing to ensure that employees wore adequate personal protective clothing while performing asbestos work.
Gramek Construction was cited for one willful health violation for failing to have a competent person conduct an initial assessment prior to commencing Class I and Class II asbestos work. The company also was cited for 24 serious health and safety violations, 18 of which involved violations of asbestos control procedures such as failing to conduct air and exposure monitoring, failing to follow specific engineering controls and practices, allowing dry sweeping of dust and residue, failing to implement a respiratory protection program, failing to provide hygiene facilities for workers conducting asbestos removal and failing to ensure that employees wore adequate personal protective clothing for asbestos work. The remaining six serious safety violations were cited for lack of fall protection and training as well as electrical hazards.
Metalico Rochester Inc. Fined After Death at Recycling Facility
OSHA cited Metalico Rochester Inc., for alleged repeat and serious violations of workplace safety standards following the death of an employee at its 50 Portland Ave. recycling facility in Rochester, New York. The worker, who operated a large baler, was fatally crushed on June 4 when the machine unexpectedly activated while he was clearing material and he became caught between the baler’s pusher block/ram and its return cavity.
The inspection by OSHA’s Buffalo Area Office found that the company had not developed and used procedures to lock out the baler’s power source and also did not provide workers with the required training on those procedures.
“This is exactly the type of needless and devastating incident that hazardous energy control procedures are designed to prevent,” said Arthur Dube, OSHA’s area director for western New York. “Proper training and procedures would have equipped this worker with the knowledge to recognize the crushing hazard and prevent it in the first place.”
OSHA had cited Metalico Rochester Inc., in March 2010 for similar hazards at a Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, location. The recurrence of those conditions in this case resulted in citations for two repeat violations. Additionally, one serious violation was cited for not providing safe access to the baler.
Proposed penalties total $73,300.
“One means by which employers can prevent new and recurring hazards is for them to work proactively and cooperatively with their employees to develop, implement and effectively maintain an illness and injury prevention program,” said Robert Kulick, OSHA’s regional director in New York.
OSHA Cites American Phoenix for Combustible Dust Hazards, Failing to Use Protective Equipment
OSHA cited American Phoenix Inc., for 12 safety and health violations at the company’s rubber producing facility in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. Proposed fines total $51,480.
“American Phoenix has a responsibility to ensure its employees are properly protected from known hazards in the workplace,” said Mark Hysell, OSHA’s area director in Eau Claire. “Failure to ensure workers use protective clothing and respiratory protection when exposed to potentially hazardous materials demonstrates a lack of regard for their safety and health. OSHA is committed to protecting workers, especially when employers fail to do so.”
The company was cited for six serious health violations involving exposing workers to combustible dust hazards; failing to require workers to wear flame-resistant clothing while performing activities where combustible dust is present; failing to implement a continuing and effective hearing conservation program; failing to conduct a hazard assessment to determine if the use of personal protective equipment is necessary; failing to identify and monitor exposures to respiratory hazards, such as carbon black dust; failing to ensure surfaces were maintained free from accumulations of dust and waste containing asbestos, as well as other hazardous compounds; and failing to implement and train workers on a hazard communication program.
American Phoenix also was cited for four serious safety violations including electrical hazards; the lack of personal protective equipment; and failing to maintain work areas in a sanitary condition by allowing excessive amounts of potentially hazardous dust to collect on ledges, walls, and rafters.
Two other-than-serious safety violations involved the use of flexible cords and cables as a substitute for fixed wiring, and failing to provide workers with information on voluntary respirator use.
The inspection was initiated in May as the result of a complaint made to OSHA. Golden Valley, Minnesota-based American Phoenix was cited in 2002 for similar violations, such as exposure to hazardous compounds and the lack of a hearing conservation program. In addition to its Eau Claire rubber facility, the company has five other facilities that supply custom compounds and other related materials to the manufactured polymer industry. The other manufacturing sites are located in Anniston, Alabama; Topeka, Kansas; Roseville, Minnesota; Lawton, Oklahoma; and Trenton, Tennessee.
$62,000 Penalty for Multiple Hazards at Uwanta Linen Supply Inc.
OSHA has cited Elm Grove, West Virginia-based Uwanta Linen Supply Inc., for 21 safety and health violations that exposed workers to a variety of hazards. Proposed penalties total $62,400.
Eighteen serious safety and health violations, with penalties of $61,200, include failing to evaluate the facility to determine if any areas were permit-required confined spaces; properly guard floor holes; develop written energy control procedures for machines with multiple energy sources; mount portable fire extinguishers, perform annual maintenance checks on them and train employees on their use; examine forklifts before placing them in service; conduct an exposure determination for workers with exposure to bloodborne pathogens; provide fall protection for employees working on an elevated platform using forklifts; provide personal protective equipment; provide a suitable facility for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and/or body for workers exposed to injurious corrosive materials; provide a hand-washing facility readily accessible to employees; provide appropriate safety and machine guarding; provide hepatitis B vaccines to employees potentially exposed to bloodborne pathogens; ensure that all work areas were clean and in an orderly and sanitary condition; ensure that an emergency exit door was unlocked and unimpeded; ensure that electrical equipment was free from recognized hazards; keep the area around a circuit breaker panel free from materials; attach grounded conductors to terminals or leads so as to reverse polarity; effectively close knockouts; properly illuminate work areas for employees; properly illuminate each exit sign; establish a written exposure control plan to eliminate or minimize employee exposure to bloodborne pathogens; and institute an effective hearing conservation program.
Three other-than-serious safety and health violations, with penalties of $1,200, were cited for failing to properly record work-related injuries and illnesses on OSHA’s 300A log for 2008 and 2010, and failing to train employees on the hazardous chemicals in their work areas.
“By disregarding OSHA’s standards, this company is leaving its employees vulnerable to hazards that could cause serious injury or even death,” said Prentice Cline, director of OSHA’s Charleston, west Virginia, Area Office. “It is imperative that Uwanta Linen Supply address the cited violations immediately.”
OSHA Cites Cooperative Producers $126,500 for Fall and Other Safety Hazards
OSHA cited Cooperative Producers Inc., a grain elevator facility in Franklin, Nebraska, for six safety violations for exposing workers to a variety of hazards. OSHA initiated its inspection under a local emphasis program targeting grain handling establishments. Proposed penalties total $126,500.
“Hazards associated with the grain handling industry are well-recognized,” said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA’s regional administrator in Kansas City, Missouri. “Cooperative Producers failed to provide its employees with a safe and healthful environment. It is imperative that all employers take the necessary steps to eliminate hazards from the workplace.”
One willful violation, with a $70,000 proposed penalty, addresses hazards associated with fall protection on rolling stock.
Three serious violations, with $18,000 in proposed penalties, involve hazards associated with exit routes, flexible extension cords, and an electrical receptacle.
One repeat violation addresses fall protection deficiencies, and carries a proposed penalty of $38,500. The company was cited in March 2011 for a similar violation.
One other-than-serious violation, with no monetary penalty, is associated with the lack of a floor load rating.
OSHA has fined grain operators in Wisconsin, Illinois, Colorado, South Dakota, Ohio, and Nebraska following preventable fatalities and injuries.
57 Foot Fall Hazards at Work Site Lead to $180,100 Fine
OSHA cited Twin Pines Construction Inc./Teles Construction Inc., for alleged repeat, serious, and other-than-serious violations of workplace safety standards following an inspection of a Portsmouth, New Hampshire, work site. The Everett, Massachusetts, framing contractor faces a total of $180,100 in proposed fines, chiefly for fall, scaffolding, and electrical hazards.
The inspection was opened after an OSHA inspector observed an employee working without fall protection at the fifth-floor level of a building under construction at 51 Islington St. The inspection found a lack of fall protection for employees working on scaffolding and work surfaces at heights of up to 57 feet. An additional fall hazard stemmed from the use of a 6-foot ladder to access a 10-foot-high surface. Employees also were exposed to electric shocks and burns from using ungrounded electrical extension cords.
Between 2008 and 2010, Twin Pines/Teles was cited for similar hazards at work sites in Scarborough, Maine; Newbury and Salisbury, Massachusetts; and North Kingstown and South Kingstown, Rhode Island. As a result of this history, OSHA issued citations for four repeat violations with $130,500 in proposed penalties.
“The sizable fines proposed here reflect both the gravity of these hazards and this employer’s significant and continuing history of safety violations,” said Rosemarie Ohar, OSHA’s New Hampshire area director. “Each time it allows these hazards to recur, it exposes employees to the risk of death or disabling injuries.”
Additionally, eight serious violations with $46,300 in fines involved improperly erected scaffolding; no inspection by a competent person with the knowledge and authority to identify and correct scaffolding hazards; uncovered floor holes; failure to keep the fifth-floor work area, as well as areas around the top and bottom of ladders, free of construction debris; and lack of eye protection for employees using nail guns.
Finally, three other-than-serious violations with $3,300 in fines were cited for not providing injury and illness logs to OSHA in a timely manner.
Gardner Equipment Co. Cited for 22 Safety and Health Violations
OSHA cited Gardner Equipment Co., for safety and health violations at its facilities in Columbus and Juneau, Wisconsin, including one willful violation for failing to ensure workers used personal protective equipment while painting metal birdhouses at the Columbus facility. OSHA has proposed $125,900 in fines for a total of 22 violations found at the two locations.
“Gardner Equipment Co. has a responsibility to ensure its employees are properly protected from known hazards in the workplace,” said Kim Stille, OSHA’s area director in Madison. “Failing to ensure workers use protective clothing and respiratory protection demonstrates a lack of regard for workers’ safety and health. OSHA is committed to protecting workers, especially when employers fail to do so.”
The willful safety violation was cited for failing to ensure that workers at the Columbus facility wore protective clothing—including eye and face protection, gloves, and a barrier suit—while using powdered paint containing skin irritants and sensitizers. A manager was made aware of some workers experiencing skin rashes on their arms and hands, a known side effect of the paint substance. The company, also, failed to train workers on the use of personal protective equipment.
The company was cited for 16 serious health and safety violations at the Columbus facility involving failing to establish a respiratory program that includes fit testing, medical evaluations, and training; and failing to properly clean and store respirators. The employer also failed to evaluate the workplace for confined space hazards and establish a permit-required confined space program; failed to establish and train workers in a hazard communication program; failed to establish an energy control program, including the provision of lockout/tagout devices and training on proper procedures; and allowed workers to eat and drink in areas contaminated by hazardous chemicals. Other serious violations involved a nonfunctional automatic sprinkler and flame gate, and the company’s failure to have adequate explosion protection for combustible dust collectors and cyclones inside the building.
The company’s Juneau facility was cited for three serious safety violations involving their energy control program, including the lack of machine specific procedures, failure to train employees on lockout/tagout procedures, and the lack of lockout devices; as well as failing to establish a hazard communication program and provide related training.
An other-than-serious safety violation was cited at both facilities for failing to verify, through written certification, that a hazard assessment regarding personal protective equipment was performed.
Gardner, a manufacturer and painter of metal birdhouses, employs approximately 56 workers.
Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad Fined $130,800 for Safety Violations
OSHA cited Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad Co., LLC, for 22 alleged serious violations of workplace safety and health standards at its Somerville, Massachusetts, maintenance facility. Proposed fines total $130,800.
OSHA safety and health inspections, conducted between April and October, found employees in the facility’s diesel, carpentry, truck, pipe, and coach shops were exposed to potential electric shocks, electrocution, fires, falls, chemical burns, lacerations, amputations, and bloodborne pathogens, as well as to injuries from crushing, slipping, and tripping hazards.
“The sizable fines proposed here reflect the number and breadth of hazardous conditions found at this facility,” said Jeffrey A. Erskine, OSHA’s area director for Middlesex and Essex counties. “While some violations were corrected during the course of the inspection, the railroad must correct all hazards and take effective steps to prevent their recurrence.”
Specifically, OSHA found unqualified employees working on energized electrical equipment without proper personal protective equipment, such as fire-resistant clothing and voltage-rated tools. Additionally, the company was cited for exposed electrical circuits; misused power cords; the failure to lock out electrical power sources during maintenance; improper and unsecured storage of oxygen and acetylene cylinders; blockage of an emergency exit by a storage cabinet for flammables; employees allowed to dispense and dilute corrosive chemicals without face shields, hand protection, and protective clothing; unguarded saw blades; unlabeled containers of hazardous chemicals; and the failure to offer the hepatitis B vaccination to employees potentially exposed to bloodborne pathogens while cleaning passenger cars.
Safety News Links
