"Commercial divers who spend extended periods of time underwater are exposed to hazards such as drowning, circulatory and respiratory problems, and hypothermia," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "The guidance provided in this directive will help ensure consistent enforcement and compliance with OSHA's commercial diving operations standards."
OSHA's commercial diving standard , issued in 1977, applies to diving and related support operations in the general, construction and maritime industries. OSHA published a Federal Register notice in January 1985 that exempts scientific diving from the commercial diving standard's requirements if those diving operations meet certain conditions. OSHA amended the standard in February 2004 to allow recreational diving instructors and guides to comply with an alternative set of requirements instead of the decompression chamber requirements in the existing standard.
This revised directive updates the Subpart T–Commercial Diving Operations directive issued in 2006. Changes in the current directive include:
- Providing information to OSHA compliance officers, consultants, government, and industry groups in support of interventions to help minimize worker exposure to commercial diving hazards
- Listing answers to commonly asked questions about commercial diving operations
- Clarifying the requirements for and duties of workers who assist divers with their diving suits and gear, communications equipment and other functions
- Updating the instruction to ensure that current editions of other OSHA instructions, as well as industry standards and manuals, are referenced
- Updating the instruction about no-decompression air dives (Appendix D) based on Revision 6 of the U.S. Navy Diving Manual, and
- Adding electronic links to enhance the directive's Web-based usability.
Included in the directive are inspection procedures for before, during, and after dives, equipment maintenance, and recordkeeping requirements.
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. Dates for the upcoming webcasts include:
- July 29
- August 15
- August 31
Advertising Opportunities Available
MSHA Focuses Spotlight on Rib Control in Light of Recent Fatalities
The Mine Safety and Health Administration has announced that the focus of this year's Preventive Roof/Rib Outreach Program is on improved mine rib control. In 2010, there were three rib fall fatalities and two roof falls that killed three miners. In addition, two miners have died so far this year as a result of underground rib failures.
"While recent trends have shown a decline in roof fall fatalities, the incidence of rib fall deaths has remained nearly constant," said Joseph A. Main, assistant secretary of labor for mine safety and health. "Furthermore, approximately 100 miners are injured by rib falls every year, due in large part to the rise in mining heights underground."
Roof control in underground mines involves securing the top as well as the sides of travel ways, or walls, which are referred to as "ribs" in underground mines. A detailed study of 22 of the 24 rib fall fatalities that have occurred since 1995 indicates that the two greatest risk factors are mining height and depth of cover. Many mines are located in coal reserves that previously were avoided due to poor roof conditions. These mines frequently are deeper and may have abandoned mines above and/or below them, which often exert additional stress on the roof and ribs.
Other risk factors include multiple seam interactions, rock partings in the seam, and retreat mining. Joints or slickenside (smooth-surfaced) geologic features that dismember the rib increase risk. Approximately three-quarters of rib fatality victims since 1995 were roof bolting and continuous mining machine operators.
"Over the past few decades, improvements in roof control technology such as new bolting systems, automated temporary roof support systems, use of cabs and canopies, and mobile roof supports have led to a significant reduction in roof/rib fall fatalities," said Main. "Through PROP, we hope to increase mine operators' awareness about the hazards and precautions necessary to prevent such accidents."
"Coal Mine Rib Control for Mine Operators," a recently developed MSHA brochure, points out key trends in recent roof and rib accidents, and provides safety advice and tips for mine operators to consider in maintaining proper roof and rib control. Inspectors will deliver this publication and other educational materials to underground mines, and mine operators will receive an alert on the hazards and actions needed to prevent accidents.
Last month, MSHA kicked off its 2011 PROP effort with a roof control seminar at the National Mine Health and Safety Academy near Beckley, West Virginia. Participants received information on rib failure issues, as well as important reminders concerning the effects of hotter weather and humidity, which increase chances of roof fall accidents. In April, the agency issued a program information bulletin discussing conditions that contribute to rib fall hazards and suggested methods for protecting miners from such falls.
Investigation Finds Three DuPont Accidents Resulted from Numerous Safety Deficiencies
A series of preventable safety shortcomings¾including failure to maintain the mechanical integrity of a critical phosgene hose¾led to a string of three serious accidents that occurred over a 33-hour period on January 22 and 23, 2010, at the DuPont Corporation’s Belle, West Virginia, chemical manufacturing plant, according to the draft report of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB). In one of the accidents, a worker died following exposure to phosgene, a gas used as a chemical weapon in World War I.
The report makes numerous safety recommendations. Among them, DuPont is urged to enclose all of its phosgene production and storage areas so that any releases of phosgene will be contained. The CSB recommends that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) update its compressed gas safety standard to include secondary enclosures for toxic gases such as phosgene.
A CSB-produced animation depicting the sequence of events leading to the phosgene exposure was also released at a news conference in Charleston, West Virginia. The draft report and recommendations remain subject to change and final approval by a vote of the presidentially-appointed board of the CSB. That vote is expected to occur following a 45-day comment period which closes on August 22.
DuPont’s Belle facility occupies more than 700 acres along the Kanawha River, eight miles east of Charleston, the state capital. The plant produces a variety of specialty chemicals.
The series of accidents began on January 22, 2010, when an alarm sounded leading operators to discover that 2,000 pounds of methyl chloride, a flammable gas, had been leaking unnoticed into the atmosphere for five days. The next morning, workers discovered a leak in a pipe carrying oleum, producing a fuming cloud of the sulfur trioxide. The phosgene release occurred later that day, and the exposed worker died the next day in a hospital.
CSB Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso said the three accidents particularly concerned CSB personnel given DuPont’s longstanding reputation for a commitment to safety. Noting the company started as a gunpowder manufacturer in 1802, and became a major chemical producer within 100 years, Dr. Moure-Eraso said, “DuPont has had a stated focus on accident prevention since its early days. Over the years, DuPont management worked to drive the injury rate down to zero through improved safety practices.”
Dr. Moure-Eraso continued, “DuPont became recognized across industry as a safety innovator and leader. We at the CSB were, therefore, quite surprised and alarmed to learn that DuPont had not just one but three accidents that occurred over a 33-hour period in January 2010.
CSB board member and former chairman John Bresland also spoke at the news conference: “These kinds of findings would cause us great concern in any chemical plant¾but particularly in DuPont with its historically strong work and safety culture. In light of this, I would hope that DuPont officials are examining the safety culture company-wide.”
Member Bresland noted the CSB finding that the phosgene hose that burst in front of a worker was supposed to be changed out at least once a month. But the hose that failed had been in service for seven months. Furthermore, the CSB found the type of hose involved in the accident was susceptible to corrosion from phosgene.
Team Lead Johnnie Banks said, “Documents obtained during the CSB investigation showed that as far back as 1987 DuPont officials realized the hazards of using the braided stainless steel hoses lined with Teflon, or PTFE. An expert employed at DuPont recommended the use of hoses lined with Monel, a strong metal alloy used in highly corrosive conditions. The DuPont official stated: ‘”Admittedly, the Monel hose will cost more than its stainless counterpart. However, with proper construction and design so that stresses are minimized…useful life should be much greater than 3 months. Costs will be less in the long run and safety will also be improved.’”
In fact, the Monel hose was never used. Internal DuPont documents released with the CSB draft report indicate that in the 1980’s, company officials considered increasing the safety of the area of the plant where phosgene is handled by enclosing the area and venting the enclosure through a scrubber system to destroy any toxic phosgene gas before it entered the atmosphere. However, the documents show the company calculated the benefit ratio of potential lives saved compared to the cost and decided not to make the safety improvements. A DuPont employee wrote in 1988, “It may be that in the present circumstances the business can afford $2 million for an enclosure; however, in the long run can we afford to take such action which has such a small impact on safety and yet sets a precedent for all highly toxic material activities?”
The need for an enclosure was reiterated in a 2004 process hazard analysis conducted by DuPont, but four extensions were granted by DuPont management between 2004 and 2009, and at the time of the January 2010 release, no safety enclosure or scrubber system had been constructed. CSB investigators concluded that an enclosure, scrubber system, and routine requirement for protective breathing equipment before personnel entered the enclosure would have prevented any personnel exposures or injuries.
The CSB investigation found common deficiencies in DuPont Belle plant management systems springing from all three accidents: Maintenance and inspections, alarm recognition and management, accident investigation, emergency response and communications, and hazard recognition.
CSB Team Lead Banks said, “The CSB found that each incident was preceded by an event or multiple events that triggered internal incident investigations by DuPont, which then issued recommendations and corrective actions. But this activity was not sufficient to prevent the accidents from recurring.”
The CSB draft report recommends that the DuPont Belle facility revise its near-miss reporting and investigation policy to emphasize anonymous participation by all employees so that minor problems can be addressed before they become serious. The CSB report also recommends the Belle plant ensure that its computer systems will provide effective scheduling of preventive maintenance to require, for example, that phosgene hoses get replaced on time.
The CSB draft recommends that the DuPont Corporation require all phosgene production and storage areas company-wide have secondary enclosures, mechanical ventilation systems, emergency phosgene scrubbers, and automated audible alarms, which are at a minimum consistent with the standards of the National Fire Protection Code 55 for highly toxic gases.
Industry groups have established various good practices for the safe handling of phosgene and other highly toxic materials in compressed gas cylinders. The draft report concluded that the most comprehensive guidelines are those set forth by the National Fire Protection Association, or NFPA.
The draft report recommends that industry-organizations such as the Compressed Gas Association (CGA) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC) adopt the more stringent guidelines of the NFPA for the safe handling of phosgene and other highly toxic gases.
The report recommends the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) update its compressed gas safety standard to include modern safeguards for toxic gases such as phosgene. These improved safeguards include: Secondary enclosures for units using phosgene, mechanical ventilation systems, emergency phosgene scrubbers, and automated audible alarms.
Chairman Moure-Eraso said, “Adoption of the CSB recommendations by OSHA, the Compressed Gas Association and the American Chemistry Council and, would greatly increase the safe handling of toxic gases nationally, and will protect workers from the deadly exposures.”
Recidivist Contractor Fined $354,000 for Cave-in Hazards
A Hyde Park contractor with a long history of violating workplace safety standards faces a total of $354,000 in new proposed OSHA fines, chiefly for exposing its employees to cave-in hazards at work sites in Cambridge and Framingham. Since 2000, P. Gioioso & Sons Inc., which is primarily engaged in the construction of underground water and sewer mains, had been cited seven times for repeat violations of OSHA's trenching and excavation safety standards prior to the citations resulting from these most recent inspections.
"Time and again, this employer has chosen to ignore the law and, by doing so, placed its workers' lives at risk," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Employers who ignore basic, common-sense and legally required safeguards will face substantial fines and consequences."
The Cambridge inspection was opened when an OSHA inspector observed a Gioioso employee working in an unprotected trench on Kimball Street. During the inspection, a section of the trench wall collapsed while the employee was still in the trench. The second inspection, at Grant and C Streets in Framingham, began after a concerned passer-by informed OSHA of workers in an unguarded trench. In both cases, OSHA found that the trenches lacked cave-in protection and a ladder or other safe means for workers to exit the trenches.
As a result of these conditions, OSHA has cited P. Gioioso & Sons Inc., for four willful violations, each carrying the maximum allowable penalty of $70,000. 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.
"An unguarded excavation is only seconds away from becoming a grave," said Marthe Kent, OSHA's New England regional administrator. "While the worker in the Cambridge trench was fortunate not to have been injured when the trench's sidewall collapsed, worker safety must not and can never be left to fortune. Responsible employers ensure that effective safety measures are in place and in use before their workers enter a trench."
The contractor also has been cited for five serious violations, with $32,000 in fines, for allowing employees to be exposed to being struck by the counterweight of an excavator at the Cambridge work site and a variety of other hazards at the Framingham work site. 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.
Finally, P. Gioioso and Sons Inc., has been issued three repeat citations with $42,000 in fines for trenching and electrical hazards at the Framingham work site, including failing to maintain the minimum clearance between an energized power line and excavating equipment. 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 this case, OSHA had cited the employer in 2009 for similar hazards at work sites in Somerville, Tewksbury, and Boston.
This latest significant enforcement action qualifies P. Gioioso & Sons Inc., for placement in OSHA's Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law. Initiated in 2010, the program focuses on recalcitrant employers that endanger workers by committing willful, repeat or failure-to-abate violations. For more information on the program, visit http://www.osha.gov/dep/svep-directive.pdf.
OSHA standards require that all excavations five feet or deeper be protected against collapse. Protection can be provided through shoring, sloping the soil at a shallow angle or by use of a protective trench box.
MSHA Seeks to Collect Nearly $240,000 in Unpaid Civil Penalties from Two Mining Companies
On behalf of its Mine Safety and Health Administration, the U.S. Department of Labor has filed complaints in U.S. district courts against two companies in North Carolina and Texas to collect unpaid civil fines resulting from federal mine safety violations.
One complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina against North 321 Stone Co., Inc., a surface granite mine located in Caldwell County. The department is seeking to collect unpaid civil penalties, interest, and a statutory 10 % debt collection fee, which total $196,833, for at least 103 violations cited by MSHA between August 2005 and February 2011. The department also has requested a prospective injunction and a cash performance bond to guarantee that future penalties are paid.
North 321 Stone Co., Inc., did not contest any of the proposed penalties, which became final 30 days after the citations were issued. In addition, the company failed to respond to two separate demand letters sent by the Labor Department in an attempt to collect the unpaid fines. A third letter, with the first two attached, was personally served on North 321 Stone Co., Inc. The company also failed to respond to that letter.
A second complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas against Efrain Corchado, both as an individual and doing business as Corchado's Dimensional Fence Rock. The action requests injunctive relief and to collect unpaid civil penalties incurred by Vista Rock Pickers Quarry, a crushed and broken stone operation in El Paso County, Texas, that is owned by Corchado.
In this case, the Labor Department is seeking to collect $33,979 in unpaid civil penalties for 40 violations, along with $4,643 in interest, and the statutory 10 percent debt collection fee. MSHA issued $25,065 of these penalties following its investigation of serious injuries suffered by a miner when a front-end loader rolled over on him in September 2010. MSHA also issued a citation for the mine's failure to provide the victim with proper training. The mine changed its status to "abandoned" in December 2010, shortly after the accident.
"Mine operators cannot be permitted to violate mine safety laws and simply refuse to pay penalties assessed for those violations," said Joseph A. Main, assistant secretary of labor for mine safety and health. "The Department of Labor will use the tools available under the Mine Act to pursue these scofflaws."
Bushnell Illinois Tank Co., Cited for Multiple Safety and Health Hazards
OSHA has cited Bushnell Illinois Tank Co., doing business as Schuld/Bushnell in Valley, for one willful, one repeat, 20 serious and one-other-than serious violation, following a combined safety and health inspection at the company's facility. Proposed penalties total $142,400.
OSHA's inspections of Schuld/Bushnell, which manufactures metal grain bins, were initiated in January under the agency's Local Emphasis Program for Powered Industrial Trucks and Other Material or Personnel Handling Motorized Equipment in Construction and General Industry.
"OSHA has a stringent confined space standard because employees entering and exiting a confined space could be exposed to serious hazards, including entrapment, engulfment, and dangerous atmospheric conditions," said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA's regional administrator in Kansas City, Missouri. "It is imperative that employers rigorously monitor and minimize the hazards of dangerous environments such as confined spaces, and that they provide an overall safe and healthful workplace for employees."
The willful violation involves allowing employees to work in permit-required confined spaces without having first written and implemented a confined space program.
The repeat violation is similar to an electrical violation cited in October 2006 for improper use of a flexible cord at the company's facility in Bushnell, Illinois.
The serious violations include misusing and overloading an under-hung hoist; using a damaged fiberglass ladder; exposing employees to falls of more than 4 feet; failing to properly train and document training of workers who operate industrial trucks; overloading an industrial truck; failing to inspect and remove damaged slings from service; using damaged slings to lift heavy objects; failing to guard a power-transmitting belt and pulley; exposing workers to more than 85 decibels of noise without a hearing conservation program; spray painting within 20 feet of spark-producing equipment; allowing voluntary respirator use without the required elements of a respirator program and without proper training; and allowing workers to enter a permit-required confined space without identifying hazards, providing proper training and equipment, testing atmospheric conditions, and providing an attendant at all times. Electrical violations include exposing workers to shocks through a missing stop button in a control box, using an electrical cord without a ground plug and using an outlet box without a cover. Additionally, the employer failed to maintain material safety data sheets and train workers who use or store hazardous chemicals.
The other-than-serious violation involves failing to properly record injuries and illnesses on OSHA's 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.
Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., Fined $86,000 for Combustible Dust Hazards
Pilgrim's Pride Corp., in Enterprise, Alabama, was cited for six safety violations by OSHA, following a March inspection. Penalties total $85,800. Two repeat violations with $77,000 in penalties include allowing excessive accumulation of grain dust where a housekeeping program exists but is not followed or maintained, and allowing electrical components such as motors, outlets, drop lights, and controller equipment to be subject to the accumulation of combustible dust. The company was cited for both of these violations in August 2009 at its Gainesville, Georgia, facility.
"Pilgrim's Pride continues to allow combustible dust to accumulate on motors and electrical equipment, causing the potential for a fire or explosion," said Kurt Petermeyer, OSHA's area director in Mobile. "OSHA will not tolerate this type of irresponsibility when it comes to protecting workers."
Two serious violations with $6,600 in penalties include allowing a junction box to be uncovered and exposing workers to fall hazards by not having guardrails on fixed stairs.
Two other-than-serious violations with $2,200 were cited for not recording all required information about workplace injuries in the OSHA 300 logs for 2008 and 2009.
Walgreens Store in Georgia Cited for Repeat and Serious Violations
OSHA cited the Walgreens Co., store on Covington Highway in Lithonia, Georgia, with four safety violations for exposing workers to struck-by and other hazards. Penalties total $104,500.
Three repeat violations with $99,000 in penalties include exposing employees to being struck by unsecured compressed gas cylinders; allowing workers to use an A-frame stepladder to carry inventory up and down, and then step from the ladder onto a storage shelf to load and retrieve products without guardrails or fall protection; and failing to ensure exit routes are not blocked. 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 the same three violations in May 2008 at a Chicago, Illinois, location.
One serious violation with a $5,500 penalty was cited for allowing electrical panel access to be blocked by display material, plastics totes, and inventory.
"This employer failed to address common and basic hazards posed by blocked exits, falls from heights, and being struck by a heavy gas cylinder," said Bill Fulcher, director of OSHA's Atlanta-East Area Office, which conducted an investigation in January. "All employers have a responsibility to keep the work environment safe for their employees."
Tyson Foods Cited for Process Safety and Other Violations
Tyson Foods Inc., in Dakota City, Nebraska, has been cited for one repeat and nine serious violations by the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration. These violations, carrying proposed penalties of $71,500, were cited following combined safety and health inspections at the facility.
OSHA's inspections of the red meat producer were initiated in May 2011 under the agency's Site-Specific Targeting Program for industries with high occupational injury and illness rates, and its Process Safety Management Covered Chemical Facilities National Emphasis Program. OSHA's PSM standard emphasizes the management of dangers associated with highly hazardous chemicals, and establishes a comprehensive management program that integrates technologies, procedures and management practices.
"OSHA has a stringent PSM standard," said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA's regional administrator in Kansas City, Missouri. "It is imperative that employers rigorously update and properly maintain each element of the process to minimize hazards, and provide a safe and healthful workplace for employees."
Six of the serious violations involve failing to ensure fixed ladders were maintained in a safe condition; ensure personal protective equipment was worn where necessary; inspect lockout/tagout energy control procedures on an annual basis in the manner prescribed by the standard; maintain electrical installations in a safe condition; provide strain relief for electrical cords; and store incompatible chemicals in separate areas. The remaining three serious violations relate directly to the PSM, including failing to ensure that installed equipment met recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices relating to discharge locations; develop valve change out/installation procedures under the PSM mechanical integrity element; and ensure that nondestructive piping inspections were conducted within five years.
The repeat violation is similar to a PSM-related violation issued in January 2011 at the company's Lexington facility for failing to inspect and ensure that installation of system relief valves was accomplished in accordance with the manufacturer's guidelines.
Jewel Food Stores Fined $75,000 for Safety Violations
OSHA cited Jewel Food Stores Inc., in Franklin Park, Illinois, for 13 safety violations after an evaluation of the company's process safety management system was found lacking several required elements for handling ammonia refrigeration systems used in the food warehouse/distribution center. Proposed penalties total $75,000.
"Developing and following written procedures for the handling of substances like ammonia is critical to employees' safety," said Diane Turek, OSHA's director for the Chicago North Area Office located in Des Plaines. "Employers are responsible for knowing what hazards exist in their workplaces and following OSHA's regulations."
One repeat violation was cited for failing to develop and implement written operating procedures consistent with process safety information that provided clear instruction for safely conducting activities related to each covered process. Jewel Food Stores was cited for the same violation in March 2010.
Ten serious violations involve failing to document inspections and tests performed on process equipment to maintain its mechanical integrity; not performing inspections and tests at applicable manufacturers' recommendations; not following generally accepted good engineering practices when performing inspections and testing of process equipment; not establishing and implementing written procedures to maintain the integrity of process equipment; and not annually certifying that operation procedures were current and accurate. Additionally, the process safety information did not include the safe upper and lower limits of items such as temperatures, pressures, flows or compositions, and it did not include piping and instrument diagrams. Finally, the hazard analysis did not address the hazards of the process and operating procedures, and it did not address normal operations for each operating phase.
Two other-than-serious violations were cited for failing to maintain a contract employee injury and illness log, and lacking procedures for handling small releases of ammonia in the emergency action plan.
OSHA Cites T & D Metal Products for 4 Safety Violations after Two Workers Suffer Amputations
OSHA cited T & D Metal Products, LLC, with four safety, including three willful, violations, after two workers suffered amputation injuries at the company's Watseka, Illinois, metal stamping facility. The incidents occurred on two separate press brakes, on January 10 and January 18. Proposed penalties for the citations total $214,830.
"T & D Metal Products failed to ensure machine guarding and safety procedures were in place to protect employees, even after a worker was injured. This negligence contributed to a second worker being injured on the same type of equipment eight days later," said Tom Bielema, OSHA's area director in Peoria. "Employers have a responsibility for following established safety practices to ensure equipment has safety guards and workers are provided with adequate training."
The willful violations include failing to lock out/tag out hazardous energy sources prior to performing maintenance operations and to have point-of-operation guarding on the press brakes on both January 10 and January 18.
One serious safety violation was cited for failing to use safety blocks when dies were being adjusted and repaired.
Initiated in June 2010, the program focuses on recalcitrant employers that endanger workers by committing willful, repeat or failure-to-abate violations. T & D Metal Products, LLC, was placed in the program due to the company's previous OSHA violations and the egregious violations cited in the January incidents. A violation is deemed egregious when a company is cited for instance-by-instance violations of the same standard, such as failing to provide machine-guarding protection.
Safety News Links
