A memorandum issued to OSHA's regional offices explains the interim policy, which is in effect until October 31, 2014. The policy delays enforcement of most new requirements for employers who are complying with the existing General Industry rule.
The final rule revises the 40-year-old construction standard for electric power line work to improve workplace safety and health for workers performing electric power generation, transmission, and distribution work. The new rule is more consistent with the corresponding general industry standard and makes some revisions to the construction and general industry requirements. In addition, the new standard for electrical protective equipment applies to all construction work and replaces the existing construction standard, which was based on out-of-date information, with a set of performance-oriented requirements consistent with the latest revisions of the relevant consensus standards.
EPA’s New Solvent Wipe, Shop Towel Rule Demystified
- Does the rule apply to both cloth and paper wipes and rags?
- What solvents can be on the towels, and which are prohibited?
- Does the rule also apply to towels that contain characteristic hazardous waste?
- Can P or U-listed wastes be on the towels?
- How must the towels be stored on-site?
- Do they need to be tested for anything?
- How long can they be stored?
- How must the containers be marked or labeled?
- How must they be prepared for transportation?
- Where can you ship them and what are the disposal and recycling options?
- What are the documentation requirements?
- How is the new rule impacted by current state regulations?
How to Implement OSHA’s Globally Harmonized Hazard Communication Standard (GHS)
OSHA has issued a final rule revising its Hazard Communication Standard, aligning it with the United Nations’ globally harmonized system (GHS) for the classification and labeling of hazardous chemicals. This means that virtually every product label, safety data sheet (formerly called “material safety data sheet” or MSDS), 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 safety data sheets.
Cleveland RCRA and DOT Training
Greensboro RCRA and DOT Training
Dallas RCRA and DOT Training
If Cells Could Talk, What Would They Tell Us About Chemical Exposure?
Applications of Cell-Based Bioanalytical Method, a two-part seminar, will feature Dr. Michael Denison of the University of California Davis Superfund Research Program (SRP) and Dr. Scott Boitano from the University of Arizona SRP and will focus on applications of cell-based bioanalytical methods to better understand environmental toxicities.
OSHA Fines Dollar Tree Stores $177,800 for Exposing Employees to Serious Safety Hazards
Employees at the Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., location in Boston's Roslindale neighborhood repeatedly faced the dangers of blocked exits and hazardous conditions in the store's stockroom, according to an inspection by OSHA. Dollar Tree Stores faces a total of $177,800 in proposed fines following a complaint inspection by OSHA's Braintree Area Office.
"This case reflects this company's deliberate and ongoing refusal to effectively address hazards that have been cited multiple times at their stores across the country," said Brenda Gordon, OSHA's area director for Boston and southeastern Massachusetts. "On his initial visit to the store, the OSHA inspector informed management of the hazards and the need to correct them. Yet, on subsequent visits, the inspector found these hazardous conditions again and again, showing an unacceptable disregard for employee health and safety."
In its December 2013 inspection, OSHA found merchandise in the store's stockroom was consistently stacked in an unstable and unsecured manner that exposed workers to crushing injuries should the stacks collapse. Emergency exit routes were also consistently blocked by store inventory, shopping carriages, a conveyor, and garbage. In addition, the store failed to maintain a means of access to an electrical control panel so that employees could turn off the store's electrical power in the event of an emergency.
For these conditions, OSHA cited Dollar Tree Stores for three willful violations with $174,500 in fines. 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.
OSHA also cited the company for one serious violation, with a $3,300 fine, for allowing trash and garbage to accumulate throughout the stockroom, creating tripping and exit hazards for the workers. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.
Dollar Tree Stores has been inspected 153 times nationally over 19 years and was cited for 453 violations of OSHA standards. Within the last five years, Dollar Tree Stores was cited 51 times for the same violations being cited willfully at the Roslindale store. Earlier this year, Dollar Tree Stores was cited for similar violations at stores in Wilmington, Delaware and Missoula, Montana.
"Placing employees repeatedly at risk of serious injuries or death is serial behavior for this company, and it must change," said Robert Hooper, OSHA's acting regional administrator for New England. "A large employer such as Dollar Tree Stores has a responsibility to its employees to ensure safe and healthful working conditions for workers at all of its more than 5,000 locations."
Headquartered in Chesapeake, Virginia, Dollar Tree Stores is a large single-price-point retailer, operating 5,080 stores in 48 states and five Canadian provinces as of May 3.
Burgos Construction Corp. Cited for Serious Fall Protection Violations—Company Has Been Cited 7 Times in the Last 2 Years
The company was hired to build a new apartment complex in Tampa and work on three new residences.
"Burgos Construction has been cited seven times in the past two years for not providing fall protection for its employees engaged in residential construction. Company officials are fully aware of the fall protection requirements," said Les Grove, OSHA's area director in Tampa. "Falls are the leading cause of death in the construction industry. Allowing workers exposure to a fatal fall or serious injury demonstrates the employer's lack of commitment to worker safety."
The willful violations were cited because the employer failed to provide fall protection systems to workers at each of the four job sites where they installed floor joists and conducted framing and roofing work at heights ranging from 9 to 28 feet. OSHA requires a fall protection system when residential activities are 6 feet or greater. The willful violations carry penalties of $215,600.
With a $6,160 penalty, the repeat violation was cited for allowing workers to use a ladder improperly. 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 facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years. Burgos Construction was cited for these same violations in May 2013.
The employer was cited for serious violations, with $6,930 in penalties, for failing to provide fall protection training for workers and for allowing employees to access a second floor stairwell that was not protected by handrails on both sides.
Burgos Construction was established in 2012 and has been inspected by OSHA eight times within the past two years. The company has received multiple citations for repeat and serious violations of the construction standards.
Fresh From Texas Inc. and iWorks Personnel Inc. Fined $135,200 for Exposing Workers to Hazards
In this case, both Fresh From Texas and iWorks failed to do so and put workers in danger," said Kelly C. Knighton, OSHA's area director in San Antonio. "Both host employers and staffing agencies have roles in complying with workplace health and safety requirements, and they share responsibility for ensuring worker safety and health."
Regarding slicing and dicing machines, violations were cited for failing to establish a written lockout/tagout program for energy sources to ensure machines were turned off when workers were inside them; provide machine operators with training; guard rotating gears; and provide safety instructions on the machines.
Two repeat violations were cited, with a penalty of $49,500, for failing to ensure sufficient working space around electrical equipment and unobstructed access to fire extinguishers. Similar violations were cited in 2012. Three other violations, with a penalty of $3,300, were cited for failing to record injuries of temporary workers, review the log for accuracy and ensure safety instructions were clearly posted on dangerous machines.
OSHA inspectors found that temporary workers employed by iWorks Personnel were also exposed to chemical hazards and were not trained on chemical safety. As a result, OSHA cited iWorks for one serious safety and health violation, with a penalty of $6,300.
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.
In April 2013, OSHA announced an initiative to improve workplace safety and health for temporary workers. During the inspection, OSHA inspectors paid special attention to the hazards facing temporary workers to determine the role the host employer and the staffing agency played in the dangers.
TLD Ace Corp. Fined $85,146 for Exposing Workers to Fall, Fire, and Electrical Hazards
An inspection by OSHA has found that workers at the TLD Ace Corp., manufacturing plant in Windsor were exposed to potential falls, burns, and electric shock due to missing or inadequate safeguards at the company's manufacturing plant.
"This inspection started with a focus on one hazard, but a review of the plant's illness and injury records showed a higher-than-industry-average rate of workdays lost due to injury and illness. For this reason, we expanded our investigation to encompass the entire plant," said Warren Simpson, OSHA's area director in Hartford. "What we found were conditions that could seriously injure workers or negatively impact their health. It's crucial for this company to correct these conditions now and take action to prevent them from happening again."
As a result, OSHA cited the manufacturer of aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment for 17 serious violations of workplace safety standards. TLD Ace Corp., faces $85,146 in proposed fines for these violations.
OSHA found that the employees lacked safety railings or fall arrest systems; the roof lacked barricades to keep employees from areas where they could fall into an electrical substation; and a ladder used to access the roof did not extend at least 3 feet over the roof's edge to ensure required stability. The workers faced potential falls of more than 16 feet to the ground below.
Pep Boys Auto Centers Continues to Expose Employees to Workplace Hazards
Two Pep Boys-Manny, Moe, & Jack of Delaware, Inc., work sites in Aurora and Lone Tree, Colorado were cited for two repeat and one serious violation by OSHA for failing to abate previously cited violations and continuing to expose workers to hazards from dangerous equipment. OSHA began its inspection of the automotive service centers in December 2013 after receiving a worker complaint. Proposed penalties total $58,300.
"Pep Boys continues to expose its workers to safety hazards while working under elevated vehicles by failing to provide safety locks and blocking. This negligence concerning worker safety is unacceptable and will not be tolerated," said David Nelson, OSHA's area director in Englewood, Colorado.
One repeat violation, with a penalty of $27,500, was cited at the Aurora location on 12820 E. Mississippi Ave. for exposing workers to crushing hazards while working under elevated vehicles. Automotive lifts were not lowered onto the safety locks or supported by adequate stands to prevent the vehicle from falling in case the lift failed. Similar violations were previously cited at one Lakewood and two Colorado Springs locations in July and August 2013, and most recently in February 2014.
Another repeat violation, with a penalty of $27,500, was cited at the Lone Tree location on 7469 Park Meadows Drive for exposing workers to crushing hazards by failing to provide lifts with operational safety locks or using adequate stands to support the vehicle. Additionally, a serious violation was cited, with a penalty of $3,300, for exposing workers to electrical shock hazards while working with a 220-volt cord and plug-powered equipment.
JA Siding Construction Services Fined $42,240 for Repeat Fall Prevention Hazards
Jose M. Hernandez Cruz, doing business as JA Siding Construction Services, LLC, of Marietta, has been cited by OSHA for three repeat and four serious safety violations. Citations were issued to the employer for exposing workers to falls and other hazards while employees were installing siding at a new residence on Westwood Road SE in Smyrna. OSHA began its inspection in February 2014 as part of the region's emphasis program on falls in construction. Penalties total $42,240.
"It is unacceptable that the employer continues to violate OSHA standards by exposing workers to serious fall and other hazards," said Christi Griffin, director of OSHA's Atlanta-West Area Office. "Falls are the leading cause of death in construction, and repeat violations demonstrate the employer's lack of commitment to safety and to the lives of its workers. The employer must take corrective action immediately."
The employer was cited for repeat violations for failing to ensure employees working on scaffolding systems more than 10 feet above the ground were protected from falls; to provide workers with fall protection systems; and to secure the scaffolding system to a base structure. OSHA proposes $32,560 in penalties for the repeat violations. The employer was cited for these same violations in October 2013.
The serious violations, with $9,680 in penalties, were cited for failing to provide workers with eye and face protection; to ensure that the manufacturer did not exceed its safe operating pressure for hoses, pipes, and valves; and not providing a training program for workers exposed to fall hazards.
The page offers fact sheets, posters, and videos that vividly illustrate various fall hazards and appropriate preventive measures.
Employer Agrees to Pay Worker Who Was Fired After Filing OSHA Complaint
The department sued the West Springfield furniture retailer after an investigation by OSHA found merit to the worker's complaint that he had been fired by his employer on May 11, 2011, two days after he filed a complaint with OSHA alleging safety and health hazards at the store.
"This settlement puts on notice those employers who would penalize employees for contacting OSHA or raising safety and health concerns. We will not tolerate such behavior; employees should not have to endure it," said Patrick Kapust, OSHA's acting deputy regional administrator for New England. "Workers are entitled to have a voice in the workplace concerning their safety and health."
Under the terms of a consent judgment entered in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Springfield, Pottern will pay the settlement in weekly installments. Failure to do so could result in the full amount coming due at once. To ensure payment, Pottern has provided the department with a security interest in a car that he owns, so that the department may lawfully secure possession and sell it to satisfy unpaid portions of the judgment, if necessary.
"Employees are entitled to many workplace protections under federal law, including the right to file complaints with the department when they believe those rights have been compromised," said Michael Felsen, regional solicitor of labor for New England. "When employers try to silence their workers through unlawful retaliation, the department will work vigorously to secure the appropriate legal redress for workers."
The judgment also permanently enjoins and restrains Pottern from future violations of the anti-discrimination provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. He must expunge the former employee's personnel record and provide a written, neutral job reference for him, if requested. Finally, he must inform employees of their rights by posting English and Spanish versions of the OSHA poster at the workplace and a fact sheet outlining employees' anti-discrimination rights.
OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of the OSH Act and 21 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various airline, commercial motor carrier, consumer product, environmental, financial reform, food safety, health care reform, nuclear, pipeline, worker safety, public transportation agency, maritime, and securities laws.
Reference Exposure Levels Proposed for TDI and MDI
RELs are airborne concentrations of a chemical that are not anticipated to result in adverse non-cancer health effects for specified exposure durations in the general population, including sensitive subpopulations.
OEHHA is required to develop guidelines for conducting health risk assessments under the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program (Health and Safety Code Section 44360(b)(2)). In response to this statutory requirement, OEHHA develops RELs for many air pollutants. The MDI and TDI RELs were developed using the most recent "Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Technical Support Document for the Derivation of Noncancer Reference Exposure Levels," finalized by OEHHA in 2008.
The distribution of these documents will commence a 60-day public review period that will end on September 2, 2014. After the close of the public comment period, the documents will be revised as appropriate by OEHHA, and peer reviewed by the State's Scientific Review Panel on Toxic Air Contaminants in late 2014.
Comments on the documents may be directed in writing or by e-mail, and any inquiries concerning technical matters or availability of the documents to:
Dr. David Siegel
Chief, Air Community and Environmental Research Branch
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
1001 I St
Sacramento, CA, 89814
Phone: 916-322-5624
Safety News Links
