The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Northern Steel Castings for two safety and four health violations at its Wisconsin Rapids carbon steel foundry, including for overexposing workers to crystalline silica, a known respiratory hazard, according to a Nov. 28 press release.
Proposed fines total $95,480.
OSHA initiated the inspection after receiving a complaint alleging overexposure to crystalline silica, a basic component of soil, sand, granite and other minerals. When workers chip, cut, drill or grind objects that contain silica, small particles can be created and breathing in crystalline silica dust can cause silicosis, an incurable condition that reduces the ability of lungs to take in oxygen.
Northern Steel Castings also was cited for two repeat health violations for allowing workers to be overexposed to iron oxide and copper fumes in the foundry, and for exposing employees to fire hazards when welding inside plywood booths.
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 these violations in 2006.
Additionally, three serious health violations were cited for failing to keep eating surfaces free from contamination by hexavalent chromium; failing to provide ventilation when welding, and for failing to provide adequate emergency exits.
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.
Northern Steel Castings had been inspected by OSHA 24 times prior to this inspection and was cited for overexposure to silica six other times. The company has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
An Illinois coal mine in Saline County has been placed on notice by the U.S. Department of Labor for the second time in two years over health and safety concerns.
Willow Lake Mine, an underground mine operated by Peabody Energy, employs about 483 people. Peabody is the largest coal producer in the Midwest, shipping about 30 million tons of coal annually from Illinois and Indiana mines to electricity generators and industrial customers throughout the Midwest.
DOL’s Mine Safety and Health Administration said Wednesday that the Peabody mine, along with seven other mines in Kentucky, Nevada, Virginia and West Virginia had troublesome compliance records. A review of self-reported safety data at the Illinois coal mine uncovered a repetitive pattern of serious violations, according to a letter sent to the coal mine operator Wednesday.
“In April, MSHA briefed stakeholders on a new and transparent online tool that allows mine operators to regularly monitor their compliance and injury records; and make adjustments to improve health and safety accordingly,” said Joseph A. Main, assistant secretary of labor for mine safety and health. “Unfortunately, some operators either did not use this tool or did not response with effective improvements.”
Beth Sutton, a spokeswoman for the Willow Lake mine, said DOL’s notice is based on outdated data. She said current data shows that the mine has improved its safety record.
“The mine has taken aggressive actions to improve safety, improving the mine’s incident rate 60 percent year-to-date through October,” she said. “This rate is more than 30 percent better than the underground industry average based on the most recent statistics available. Willow Lake will continue working with MSHA to drive continuous safety improvement.”
I have had many questions lately asking “What should I expect and how do I handle an OSHA Inspection?”, thus this posting.
Being prepared to handle an OSHA inspection or investigation properly minimizes the employer’s exposure to liability and eliminates unnecessary anxiety surrounding the inspection. Inspections or investigations can be triggered by:
Target inspections (especially for industries designated for special emphasis programs);
Employee complaints;
Claim of imminent danger where there has been a fatality; and
Where three or more employees are hospitalized as a result of an accident or illness.
If you ask, the OSHA compliance officer generally will tell you why he or she is there. If the inspection was triggered by an employee complaint, the company is entitled to an explanation as to the reason for the inspection and can ask for a copy of the complaint.
Direct the OSHA compliance officer to the company’s designated safety officer prior to the opening conference. The safety director should obtain the compliance officer’s credentials and his or her business card with an address and phone number to ensure that the compliance officer is on an official inspection. The opening conference should begin at this point.
If the company is a union shop, the compliance officer will probably request that a union representative be present at the conference to report any employee concerns and will ask the union representative to accompany him or her in the inspection “walk-around.”
The company should say as little as possible. The compliance officer will not only seek general information, but also may seek specific admissions concerning an employer’s knowledge of unsafe conditions. Be helpful and courteous, but watch out for questions designed to elicit knowledge of uncorrected hazards. Don’t volunteer information.
Show the OSHA inspector the company’s commitment to its safety statement, but be aware that OSHA does not like employee safetyincentive programs. The existence of an incentive program may bias the inspector against the company. OSHA’s view is that the effect of safety incentive programs is under-reporting of injuries and illnesses.
Generally, the compliance officer can examine records that an employer is required to maintain under the Act, such as the log and summary of occupational illnesses and injuries (OSHA 200 Log), the supplemental record of occupational illnesses and injuries, and Material Safety Date Sheets.
The company is required to keep its logs of injuries and illnesses on file for the specified period (5 years), but the safety manager should not volunteer logs unless they are specifically requested by the inspector. Information contained in these logs may cause the inspector to conduct additional employee interviews and lead to a stricter examination of the company’s safety training programs.
However, management should be ready to produce records concerning compliance programs required by specific OSHA standards. Examples include:
Other records, such as accident reports, insurance company studies, and employee medical records should not be given to the compliance officer without the proper request procedures being followed. Employee medical records should be obtained by OSHA in compliance with a medical access order. The order must be posted so that the employee has a chance to object to the release of the records.
The next phase of the inspection is the walk-around. The company’s designated walk-around representative should be the facility’s safety officer, who should stay with the OSHA compliance officer at all times. If possible, two employer representatives should also be present to take detailed notes and/or photographs or videos if necessary.
The OSHA compliance officer is limited to the areas identified in the complaint or warrant, together with those areas consented to by the employer. The inspection may be expanded based on records or additional information obtained from a previous “limited” inspection. It is important that the inspection be of only the appropriate areas, but a violation in plain view can be cited and may expand the scope of the inspection. The employer representatives should say as little as possible during the inspection Any comments may be used against the employer in later citation proceedings and may compromise defenses available to the employer.
The employer should take certain proactive steps during the walk-around inspection. Be sure to:
Take detailed notes of all comments and questions asked by the OSHA compliance officer;
Take photographs, videotapes/audiotapes and measurements of inspected work areas and machinery to correspond to the photographs, videotapes and measurements taken by the compliance officer; and
Make note of the names of any employees interviewed by the compliance officer.
The employer must not take any action against an employee who interviews or cooperates with the OSHA compliance officer. Retaliation carries extremely heavy penalties under federal and state law.
The company representatives should advise the OSHA compliance officer in advance of any concerns the company has regarding possible trade secrets and other proprietary information. The authority of the OSHA compliance officer is limited. For example, the compliance officer:
must conduct employee interviews within “reasonable” limits and in a “reasonable” manner
may not conduct private employee interviews on employer’s premises unless the employer consents
is not allowed to view employee medical records without the proper request order, but is allowed to determine if the records are being maintained
should not enter restricted/posted areas unless proper precautions are taken
must wear required protective equipment such as goggles, hard hats, gloves and earplugs
may not take photographs if the flash would produce a hazard or disrupt the work area
may not cause an unreasonable disruption or interference with operations.
After the walk-around, the compliance officer will conduct a closing conference. He or she will describe any “apparent violations” to the company’s representatives and explain the company’s rights and responsibilities. The compliance officer may ask how much time is needed to abate the “apparent violation.” An affirmative response to this question may be deemed an admission of a violation and could subject the company to a heavier fine. Preface any response with: “If a violation exists . . .”
If an apparent violation cannot be contested in good faith, the company should try to abate it during the inspection. This could result in a reduced penalty. Take detailed notes on problems addressed by the compliance officer (with the applicable standards) and the suggested abatement procedures.
At the closing conference, verbally confirm the scope of the inspection as stated in the opening conference, and send a follow-up letter to the compliance officer confirming the scope of the inspection.
Any citation must be issued within six months of the start of the inspection, but are usually issued within a few weeks. There are strict time limits (15 days) within which a company may contest the citation. The company’s mail room must be alerted that a letter from OSHA is expected and instructed to give it to the designated company representative immediately upon receipt.
If you are issued a citation, it should be posted (with penalty amounts deleted) in the area cited, as well as where company notices normally are posted. Notify the company’s OSHA counsel immediately. The company may want to request an informal conference with the OSHA area director, depending on how the nature of the violations, the penalty classification, whether abatement is feasible, and the cost of abatement. The informal conference may or may not result in an informal settlement, but the request for an informal conference does not extend the time for the filing of a notice of contest.
When it comes to electrical safety, OSHA standards can be technical and confusing. What requirements do safety managers need to know?
Wouldn’t it be nice to know exactly what OSHA is training its inspectors to look for during an inspection that includes electrical safety, including surprising new areas of emphasis based on national OSHA directives?
This article covers some of the typical electrical safety questions that OSHA inspectors will ask during a field investigation, what they mean and how to be prepared and in compliance.
A good starting point is to understand OSHA’s approach to electrical safety. OSHA’s goal is for employers to identify all electrical hazards, both potential and actual. In the past, OSHA focused on process changes, encouraging companies to de-energize circuits before working on them, perform lockout/tagout procedures and develop ongoing safety programs that include worker training and retraining. A more recent area of emphasis is arc flash safety, which means electrical safety professionals must analyze the workplace for shock and arc flash hazards, establish safe protection boundaries and define what personal protective equipment (PPE) must be used within these boundaries.
For electrical safety in the workplace, OSHA relies on expert consensus bodies such as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and its standards published in NFPA 70E. To ensure that employers are following NFPA and OSHA guidelines, OSHA trains its inspectors and compliance officers to ask specific questions in the event of an electrical safety incident. Some typical questions follow.
Is there a description of the circuit or equipment at the job location?
OSHA expects employers to know their workplaces. If an employer cannot provide a written description or drawing of the circuit or equipment, then the compliance officer may assume that the employer has not assessed the facility for electrical hazards.
Is there a detailed job description of planned work?
In order to know which safety procedures to use, the worker must be provided with a description of the job task. OSHA publication 29 CFR 1910 lays out employer responsibilities for protecting their workers from electrical safety hazards. It states that the employer shall train workers to use safe work practices that are designed to avoid injury.
Can you justify why equipment cannot be de-energized or the job deferred until the next scheduled outage?
Per OSHA 1910.333(a)(1), live parts to which an employee may be exposed must be de-energized before the employee works on or near them, unless the employer can demonstrate that de-energizing introduces additional or increased hazards or is not feasible due to equipment design or operational limitations. (Live parts that operate at less than 50 volts to ground need not be de-energized if there will be no increased exposure to electrical burns or to explosion due to electric arcs.)
The message is clear: never work on live circuits unless it is absolutely necessary. OSHA allows work on live circuits in some cases, but the reason cannot be simply that turning off the power is inconvenient or will interrupt production. Nor can workers use the excuse that they didn’t have the authority to shut off power.
When it is necessary to perform work on energized equipment, OSHA 1910.333(a)(2) requires safety-related work practices to be used and NFPA 70E Article 110.8(B)(1) requires an Electrical Hazard Analysis before work is performed on live equipment operating at 50 volts and higher.
Other questions you can expect from an OSHA inspector include:
What about safe work procedures?
Has a detailed work procedure been established?
Are there detailed descriptions of work practices to be employed?
Was a job briefing checklist performed, and was the job briefing completed for those performing the work?
Was proper management approval secured?
OSHA wants employers to make electrical safety procedures and practices part of regular work processes. Several annexes to NFPA 70E offer guidelines for lockout/tagout procedures, checklists and approvals. For example, Annex E covers Electrical Safety Programs, Annex F covers Hazard Risk Evaluation Procedures, Annex I covers Job Briefing Checklists and Annex J covers Energized Work Permits.
NFPA 70E annexes are not strictly “enforced” by OSHA, as they are appendices to the NFPA standard. However, OSHA inspectors and investigators will ask if the content and information contained in these annexes was followed and adhered to.
As an EHS professional, would you know the answers to these questions if an OSHA inspector came knocking on your door?
Were required electrical safety analyses performed?
Were all other potential electrical hazards identified?
OSHA regulations state that every employer shall furnish a place of employment free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm, and that the employer must assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present and select PPE to protect employees. When it comes to electrical safety, OSHA refers to NFPA 70E, which requires employers to conduct an electrical hazard assessment consisting of a shock hazard analysis and an arc flash hazard analysis before work is performed on live equipment operating at 50 volts and higher.
These requirements may be fairly complex, as they involve calculating the potential fault current at each piece of equipment, understanding the characteristics of the overcurrent protective devices and how they are coordinated for each circuit and creating or updating one-line electrical drawings. Complex or not, OSHA inspectors are trained to ask if these analyses were performed, because they are essential to reducing the number of arc flash-related deaths and injuries that occur each year, as well as ensuring a safe installation.
When the safety of any job task involves electricity or electrical equipment, ask yourself these questions:
Were proper tools and equipment used?
Was the necessary PPE determined?
Were the proper insulated tools used?
Were insulated blankets and/or sheeting used to properly cover all of the live parts?
OSHA 1910.132 requires employers to assess hazards, select PPE and make sure that employees are trained how to use it. Electrical PPE, safe work practices such as lockout/tagout and safety training are covered by OSHA 29 CFR 1910.301-.399, also known as Electrical Subpart S.
For example, OSHA 1910.333 (a)(1)(i) states: “Employees working in areas where there are potential electrical hazards shall be provided with and shall use, electrical protective equipment that is appropriate for the specific parts of the body to be protected and for the work to be performed.”
For electrical workers, this standard’s effect is multi-fold. First, employers must facilitate workers’ understanding of the PPE required for each task on each piece of equipment. This may be communicated via a work order, a descriptive label on the equipment or a one-line drawing. Second, employers must select the PPE, which includes insulated tools and protective clothing. Third, the employer is required to train workers in safe work practices – and in particular, how to match the PPE to the level of the electrical hazard. And finally, OSHA 1910.269(a)(2)(iii) requires employers to “determine, through regular supervision and through inspections conducted on at least an annual basis, that each employee is complying with the safety-related work practices …”
Were the workers performing the tasks qualified to do so?
OSHA defines qualified workers as those specially trained to work on live electrical equipment. Qualified workers must protect themselves against all electrical hazards including shock, arc flash, burns and explosions. Training is key. Even an experienced electrician is not “qualified” in OSHA’s eyes unless the employer can show proof of the appropriate training and certifications.
OSHA 1910.332(b)(2) also requires unqualified workers to be trained in the electrical safe work practices that are necessary for their safety. Unqualified workers, such as painters or cleaners, occasionally come into contact with energized equipment, and therefore they must be trained to recognize and avoid electrical hazards.
Kenneth Cybart, senior technical sales engineer at Littelfuse, trains managers how to keep electrical workers safe and meet OSHA and NFPA standards. He has 20 years of experience in circuit protection applications, has authored several electrical safety articles and has been a speaker at industry events. He can be reached at kcybart@littelfuse.com.
OSHA has cited ERA Valdivia Contractors Inc., an industrial painting and sandblasting company in Chicago, with $130,300 in proposed penalties for exposing workers to dangerous lead materials.
Based on a November 2009 inspection, OSHA has cited the company with two willful violations and a proposed $112,000 penalty for failing to provide adequate personal protective equipment to employees working in and around lead while performing abrasive blasting and painting. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing, or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirement, or plain indifference to employee safety and health.
The employer also has been cited with eight serious citations and a proposed $18,300 penalty. Some of these citations address the company’s alleged failure to ensure workers use respirators in accordance with the conditions of certification; to prohibit the use of respirators by employees with facial hair; and to provide a clean changing area for employees. An OSHA violation is serious if death or serious physical harm can result from a hazard an employer knew or should have known exists.
“Employers must ensure any employee working in and around lead, especially when he or she is abrasive blasting, should be protected from overexposure to this dangerous material,” said OSHA Area Director Diane Turek in Des Plaines, Ill. “Those who ignore these health regulations are inviting tragedy into the lives of their workers.”
ERA Valdivia has been inspected by OSHA 25 times since 1991 and has been issued numerous willful, serious, and repeat violations, including many lead violations. The company employs approximately 75 workers.
The company has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
Working with stainless steel can pose a greater threat to workers than other metals. A new rule aims to give workers more information about exposure to hexavalent chromium, a carcinogen released when stainless steel is welded, cut with a plasma torch or cast.
The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration changed its notification requirements in March. Previously, employers didn’t have to share test results unless they showed that employees had been overexposed to hexavalent chromium.
Under the new rules, employers need to share that information no matter what levels of the carcinogen were found. The OSHA rules give construction employers five workdays to provide the required notice.
Oregon OSHA, required by law to have standards at least as effective as federal standards, is set to adopt the changes in June.
The more information that workers get about their health, the better, said Robert Brown, safety director with The Lynch Co., a Portland fabrication shop.
“We tend to be more of an over-compliance company in those areas,” Brown said. Company officials post test results on the employee safety board, whatever the results.
Lynch, founded in 1919, works with metals including high-polish architectural stainless steel and heavy structural stainless steel for high-rise buildings. Employers working around hexavalent chromium wear air samplers that are inspected by a third party.
If levels are high, the company makes adjustments to ensure better ventilation and less worker exposure.
Companies that don’t work extensively with stainless steel may not take special precautions, but they may not need to, said Melanie Mesaros, spokeswoman for Oregon OSHA.
Normal welding eye protection and gloves may suffice. Greater concentrations for longer periods may require that workers wear respirators.
Awareness of hexavalent chromium is increasing in light of the federal rule change, Mesaros said. “We’ve been getting more complaints about it and doing more inspections than we’ve done before,” she said.
Albina Pipe Bending in Tualatin doesn’t weld stainless steel often, said Brian Smith, the firm’s general manager. As a result, he said, it was unclear how much precaution employees needed to take.
The company requested an Oregon OSHA inspection, Smith said. “We had them come out and test and see what kind of readings we had.”
Even though the tests showed low levels, the company still takes precautions — such as welding hoods with respirators — when it works with stainless steel.
Because health effects of hexavalent chromium, including respiratory illness and cancer, can take a long time to develop, it’s important to stay on top of exposure levels, Mesaros said.
That’s different from many work-site hazards, she said. “When you have a fall protection issue, you know the effect right away.
“But there’s a lag time with this kind of health issue,” she said. “It could take months before a person starts getting sick.”
