The revised standard was designed to improve the quality, consistency, and clarity of chemical hazard information that workers receive.
Under the standard, employers were required to train workers on the new label elements and safety data sheets by December 1, 2013. Chemical manufacturers, importers, and distributors had to comply with revised safety data sheet requirements by June 1, 2015. Manufacturers and importers had to comply with new labeling provisions by June 1, 2015. Distributors have until December 1, 2015, to comply with labeling provisions as long as they are not relabeling materials or creating safety data sheets, in which case they must comply with the June 1 deadline.
It explains how the revised standard is to be enforced during its transition period and after the standard is fully implemented on June 1, 2016.
The instruction explains how OSHA compliance officers are to enforce differences in the international regulations and the OSHA regulations. OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (HCS 2012) is based on the United Nations (UN) Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS Revision 3, 2009, also known as the Purple Book). Some manufacturers, importers, distributors, or employers may want to comply with more recent or future versions of GHS issued by the UN, such as Revision 4. However, using Revision 4 or a more recent version may result in non-compliance with HCS 2012 if it contradicts or casts doubt on OSHA required information.
A specific example of a major difference between Revision 3 and Revision 4 concerns aerosols. GHS Revision 4 changed “flammable aerosols” to “aerosols.” Revision 4 also introduced a new hazard category for aerosols: Category 3 (nonflammable). Under Revision 4 of the Purple Book, aerosols in Category 3 do not require a pictogram and are exempt from classification as a gas under pressure. OSHA’s HCS 2012 does not include Category 3 Aerosols, so if an aerosol meets the criteria for a gas under pressure, it would require appropriate label elements including the gas under pressure pictogram.
In this situation, OSHA’s guidance to its enforcement officers is to a serious citation for a Category 3 Aerosol whose label and SDS section 2 statements are in accordance with GHS Revision 4 (i.e., missing pictogram and being exempt from classification as gas under pressure).
Because other countries are adopting Revisions 4 and 5 of the Globally Harmonized System, US companies that export products internationally (as well as those that import foreign products labeled to meet other countries’ requirements) will need to carefully review each country’s requirements, and where appropriate, develop different product labels and Safety Data Sheets in order to maintain compliance with each country’s legislation.
New Exclusions for Solvent Recycling and Hazardous Secondary Materials
EPA’s new definition of solid waste rule will present new opportunities for waste recycling outside the scope of hazardous waste regulation. Environmental Resource Center will present a webcast on the new Definition of Solid Waste rule on Monday, June 29th at 2:00 pm Eastern Time. This rule, which goes into effect on July 13, 2015, will maintain critical environmental protections while streamlining the regulatory burden for wastes that are legitimately recycled.
The first of the two exclusions is an exclusion from the definition of solid waste for high-value solvents transferred from one manufacturer to another for the purpose of extending the useful life of the original solvent product by keeping the materials in commerce to reproduce a commercial grade of the original solvent product.
The second, and more wide reaching of the two exclusions, is a revision of the existing hazardous secondary material recycling exclusion. This exclusion allows you to recycle, or send off-site for recycling, virtually any hazardous secondary material, and it will not meet the definition of solid waste. Provided you meet the terms of the exclusion, the material will no longer be hazardous waste.
Learn how to take advantage of these exclusions at Environmental Resource Center’s live webcast. You will learn:
- Which of your materials qualify for the exclusion?
- What is a secondary material?
- Which solvents can be remanufactured, and which cannot?
- What is a tolling agreement?
- What is legitimate recycling?
- What are the generator storage requirements?
- What documentation must be maintained?
- What are the off-site shipping requirements?
- What are the training and emergency planning requirements?
- Can the recycler be outside the US?
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.
Environmental Resource Center is offering live online training for you to learn how the new rule differs from current requirements, how to implement the changes, and when the changes must be implemented.
Dallas RCRA and DOT Training
Birmingham RCRA and DOT Training
Indianapolis RCRA and DOT Training
Report on Workers’ Comp Reforms Shows Benefit Increases for Injured Workers, Reduced Costs to Employers
The report details increased payments to injured workers and significant cost-saving benefits for employers.
“This report confirms that the reforms are on track. Employer costs are under control and injured worker benefits are increasing,” said Labor and Workforce Development Secretary David M. Lanier. “While there is ongoing work to reduce delays and improve the system—overall the progress is impressive.”
Senate Bill 863 became law on January 1, 2013, and made wide-ranging changes to the state workers’ compensation system. These changes include the use of evidence-based medicine to guide treatment decisions, treatment dispute settlements by independent medical reviewers, and improving workers’ access to network physicians.
“The co-equal goals of Governor Brown’s 2013 reforms were to improve benefits for injured workers while moderating skyrocketing costs for employers,” said Lanier. “This required significant system changes to speed the delivery of medically appropriate care and to reduce litigation—changes which improve medical care for injured workers, fund benefit increases, and stabilize employer costs.”
Workers’ compensation costs for employers have dropped. In May 2015, the Department of Insurance adopted advisory pure premium rates for July 1, 2015, which on average are five percent less than the industry average for filed pure premium rates as of January 1, 2015, and 10.2% less than the average of the approved January 1, 2015 rates.
Benefits for injured workers have also increased. Prior to the reform legislation, the minimum weekly benefit payment for people with permanent disabilities was $130, and the maximum was $270. The new minimum weekly PD benefit is $160, and the maximum is $290. Also, the Return-to-Work-Supplement Program—which provides a one-time $5,000 supplement to eligible injured workers—became effective in April 2015. As of June 30th, DIR had issued 434 checks totaling over $2 million.
SB 863 also created an Independent Medical Review (IMR) program, in which physicians use evidence to determine the necessity of requested treatments. This process eliminates treatments recommended on the basis of profit, habitual practice, misinformation or fraud. Examples of evidence-based recommendations include:
- Opioids (narcotics) should not be first-line medications for mild or chronic pain because they have serious side effects and risks. They should be reserved for severe, short-term pain experienced with cancer treatments, major surgeries or broken bones.
- Bed rest for lower-back pain should be limited to one or two days. Longer bed rest can actually lead to slower recoveries.
- X-rays are unnecessary for mild low-back pain. They result in radiation exposure and do not help managing most low-back issues.
“The progress made since the passage of SB 863, which allows medical—rather than legal—experts to make medical decisions, is very encouraging,” said DIR Director Christine Baker. “More appropriate treatment is now being provided more quickly, which reduces waste and improves the whole system.”
Additional key findings of the report include:
- IMR decisions are being issued well within the 30-day statutory time frame from receipt of medical records.
- Lien filings are a big factor in the reduction in overall costs. The report shows that lien filings have decreased by approximately 60% since the passage of SB 863. A retrospective evaluation report of SB 863 cost monitoring completed last November by the WCIRB estimated savings of $690 million due to the reduction in lien filings.
- Commitment to evidence-based medicine is also demonstrated through recent adjustments to the Medical Treatment Utilization Schedule (MTUS). The MTUS is a set of guidelines for appropriate medical care based on high-quality, unbiased scientific studies. However, the system allows for exceptions when treatment can be based on guidance other than the MTUS.
- A Medical Provider Network (MPN) is a group of health care providers who treat injured workers. SB 863’s revisions to the MPN program went into effect on August 27, 2014. More of these networks have been approved, and they are also now more accountable to DWC. Physician listings must be updated quarterly, and if a provider leaves the network, they are required to give 45 days’ notice. Furthermore, the revised access standards require an MPN to have at least three available physicians from which injured workers can choose.
DIR and DWC are implementing the SB 863 reforms and have worked with stakeholders as provisions of the reforms moved through the rulemaking process.
OSHA Cites International Paper for Willful, Repeated, Serious Safety Violations
An OSHA inspection has determined that the death of an employee at International Paper Co.’s, Ticonderoga plant could have been prevented if his employer provided proper safeguards and training. He sustained severe burns as a result and subsequently died.
The agency opened its inspection on January 24, 2015, and found that International Paper failed to supply the employee with necessary fire-resistant clothing and did not train him and employees on the specific physical hazards of combustible fly ash. In addition, the system for conveying and collecting the fly ash was deficient. It had not been inspected for defects, did not comply with National Fire Protection Association standards and had not been maintained adequately.
A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirement, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health. An OSHA violation is serious if death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard an employer knew or should have known exists. 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.
“This worker’s death was preventable. International Paper knew of these hazards and deficiencies and did not address them,” said Kim Castillon, OSHA’s area director in Albany. “While nothing can return this man to his daughter and co-workers, the company can and must take prompt and effective steps to ensure that this never happens again.”
The inspection also found that the company’s procedures for isolating the dust conveyor system’s power source during maintenance activities were incomplete. It also found that the company failed to complete annual evaluations to ensure the procedures were effective.
Initiated in March 2011, the program focuses on recalcitrant employers who endanger workers by committing willful, repeated, or failure-to-abate violations.
International Paper, which faces $211,000 in proposed fines, is a global leader in the paper and packaging industry with manufacturing operations in the US, Europe, Latin America, Asia, and North Africa.
Hassell Construction Fined $424,000 after Trench Collapse Seriously Injures Worker
One minute he was working in the 8-foot trench below ground. The next, he was being buried in it. His co-workers came to his rescue, digging him out with their bare hands. Moments after they pulled the injured man to safety, the unprotected trench collapsed again. His injuries were serious and led to his hospitalization.
OSHA cited Hassell Construction for 16 safety violations, including six egregious willful violations for failing to protect workers inside an excavation from a cave-in. The company faces penalties totaling $423,900.
"For more than 2,500 years, man has known how to prevent deadly trench collapses. It is absolutely unacceptable that employers continue to endanger the lives of workers in trenches," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "An employer is responsible for providing a workplace safe from hazards. Hassell Construction failed to do that in this case."
In addition to the willful violations, Hassell was cited for nine serious violations, including failing to remove debris from the edge of the excavation. The company also did not provide a safe means to get in and out of the excavation for workers or conduct atmospheric testing inside excavations after a sewer leak.
"Trench cave-ins are preventable," said John Hermanson, OSHA's regional administrator in Dallas. "There are long-established, basic precautions. They're not new, and they're not secret. Hassell Construction knew its trenches weren't safe, but still put its workers in harm's way."
The program concentrates resources on inspecting employers who have demonstrated indifference towards creating a safe and healthy workplace by committing willful or repeated violations, and/or failing to abate known hazards. It also mandates follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law.
Hassell Construction employs about 150 employees to help construct water and sewer lines in the Houston area. Its workers compensation insurance carrier is Liberty Mutual.
Cotton Commercial USA and Gardia Construction Fined more than $367,000 after Worker Denied Safety Equipment
Despite his request for a safety harness, a temporary worker without fall protection on a roof later fell 12 feet through the roof. His fall resulted in his hospitalization with fractured arms and severe contusions.
The employer, Cotton Commercial USA Inc. in Katy, Texas, waited three days to report the injury, an investigation by OSHA found. Federal law requires employers to report such incidents within 24 hours.
OSHA fined Cotton Commercial $362,500 for seven safety violations, including one willful and four willful egregious. The violations include failing to provide fall protection for four workers, failure to promptly report the hospitalization of an employee resulting from a workplace incident, and not training employees in the use of fall protection and ladders.
Gardia Construction, which provided the laborers to Cotton Commercial, received a citation for one serious violation and a fine of $4,900, for failing to conduct frequent and regular inspections of the job site where its laborers worked.
"Falls kill workers, but they are preventable," said Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Cotton Commercial denied its workers the safety equipment they are required to provide, and the company intentionally waited several days to report the incident and misled OSHA's inspectors."
This includes ensuring that OSHA's training, hazard communications and record-keeping requirements are fulfilled. And for construction workers, this responsibility includes ensuring that frequent and regular inspections of worksites are conducted.
"Cotton Commercial was well aware of how to prevent safety hazard and, in fact, on the following day Cotton made sure all workers were provided with the required safety equipment. It shouldn't have to take a serious injury for a company to comply with the law," said OSHA Regional Administrator John Hermanson.
Cotton Commercial employs about 227 workers and operates throughout the US. The company provides remediation services for commercial and residential structures damaged from disasters. At the time of the accident, Texas Mutual provided company employees with workers compensation insurance. Its current provider is Affordable Insurance of Texas. Gardia Construction, located in Gretna, Louisiana, employs about 80 workers and provides labor to Cotton Commercial. Gardia does not carry workers compensation insurance.
Ashley Furniture Failed to Protect Workers from Moving Machine Parts
A 56-year-old employee of furniture manufacturer Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc., had his right ring finger amputated because the company has continued to ignore safety requirements to protect workers from moving machine parts.
After an OSHA inspection, the agency issued citations to the Arcadia, Wisconsin based company on July 21. The company was issued two willful violations for failing to protect workers from machinery operating parts and neglecting to report a hospitalization within 24 hours. OSHA cited two other-than-serious safety violations for failing to keep accurate injury records.
A person outside the company reported the injury to OSHA nearly a month after the incident. Inspectors found the groover blade of a machine used to fabricate wooden drawers caused the amputation of the machine operator's finger. A 49-year-old employee had a similar injury on the same type of machinery in January 2015, resulting in the willful violation.
"Workers at Ashley Furniture cannot count on their company to do what's right when it comes to safety. These workers are at risk because this company is intentionally and willfully disregarding OSHA standards and requirements," said Mark Hysell, OSHA's area director in Eau Claire.
In its inspections, OSHA found that Ashley failed to protect workers from dangerous machine operating parts when employees performed maintenance and during blade changes on woodworking machinery. Safety procedures require employers to prevent machines from unintentional operation during service and maintenance by using blocking and locking devices to prevent unexpected machine movement, a procedure known as lockout/tagout.
Ashley Furniture has contested citations issued by OSHA in January 2015, which cited the company for 38 safety violations at the Arcadia location. Proposed penalties total $1,766,000. A hearing before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission will be scheduled. The agency issued the citations following an investigation that found that workers at the Arcadia plant had experienced more than 1,000 work-related injuries in the previous three-and-a-half-year period.
At that time, OSHA placed the company in the SVEP for failure to address safety hazards. As a result of the SVEP designation, inspections are currently open at Ashley's facilities in California, Pennsylvania, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Forbes lists Ashley Furniture as the 117th largest private company in America with $3.85 billion in annual revenue as of October 2014. The worldwide distributor employs about 20,000 workers at 30 locations nationwide. The Arcadia plant is the largest employer in Trempealeau County.
The company has had 34 federal OSHA inspections and 23 state plan inspections since 1982. In its 33 previous inspections, OSHA issued citations for 96 serious, four repeated and 38 other-than-serious violations. Four inspections were initiated as a result of finger amputations, including one in 2014 at the Arcadia plant.
Franklin Fibre-Lamitex Corp. Fined for Exposing Workers to Potentially Explosive Combustible Dust
In addition, employees working in areas with the potential for a combustible dust fire were not provided with flame-retardant clothing.
"People hear the word 'dust' and they don't think 'deadly'—but under the right circumstances, a combustible dust explosion can level a building. The machines at this facility generated the kind of dust that can cause a fatal, destructive explosion," said Erin G. Patterson, director of OSHA's Wilmington Area Office. "It's critical that Franklin Fibre remove this hazard before a tragic incident occurs."
Proposed penalties total $86,800.
Metallurgical Products Inc. Fined $77,000 for 24 Serious Violations
The Hartford Area Office of OSHA began inspections of Metallurgical Processing, Inc., in New Britain, Connecticut, on January 15, 2015, in response to employee complaints. The inspections found employees of the company, which performs heat treatment on metal parts, were exposed to a variety of fire, explosion, chemical and mechanical hazards.
Hazards found at the site include: not training and providing protective clothing and tools to employees who performed live electrical work; not inspecting a piping system carrying anhydrous ammonia; lack of a pressure relief valve on a nitrogen tank; and improper storage of incompatible chemicals and combustible materials. The company also lacked a complete and adequate program regulating employees' work in confined spaces and adequate safeguards for employees required to wear respirators. As a result of the hazardous conditions, OSHA has cited Metallurgical Products, Inc., for 24 serious violations of workplace healthy and safety standards.
"To ensure the health and well-being of its employees, Metallurgical Products Inc. must address and correct these hazards immediately," said Warren Simpson, OSHA's area director in Hartford. "Employers need to be proactive about safeguarding their employees against work-related hazards. It's not just good policy, it is good business."
Durand Wayland Inc. Fined $45,000 for Exposing Workers to Deadly Safety Hazards
The inspection was initiated on January 29, 2015, after the agency received a complaint.
"Employees at the Durand facility are being exposed to deadly confined space, amputation and fall hazards," said Christi Griffin, OSHA's director of the Atlanta-West Area Office. "The safety program needs immediate changes to address these hazards."
Proposed penalties total $44,710.
Durand-Wayland Inc. manufactures agricultural equipment used by fruit and vegetable workers.
Steel Industries Inc. in Livonia Awarded MIOSHA Certification for Exemplary Workplace Safety
Industrial and commercial machinery manufacturing plant, Steel Industries, Inc.—Plant 5 in Livonia, Michigan, received the prestigious Michigan Safety and Health Achievement Recognition Program (MSHARP) Award certification from the Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration (MIOSHA).
Plant 5 team members display their MSHARP plaque MIOSHA established the MSHARP Award to acknowledge employers with outstanding workplace safety and health programs that far surpass their counterparts. The MIOSHA program is part of the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA).
“Steel Industries has an engaged team of employees with a strong commitment to worker protection,” said MIOSHA Director Martha Yoder. “This recognition exemplifies the result of their successful efforts to achieve excellence in workplace safety and health.”
Plant 5 employees can obtain equipment from MSHARP targets small manufacturers to help them develop, implement, and continuously improve the effectiveness of their workplace safety and health management system. The program provides an incentive for employers to emphasize accident and illness prevention by anticipating problems, not reacting to them.
The MIOSHA Onsite Consultation Program within the Consultation Education and Training (CET) Division operates the MSHARP. MSHARP worksites earn an exemption from "programmed" MIOSHA inspections on a yearly basis.
Onsite consultants work with employers to help them become self-sufficient in managing occupational safety and health. The MIOSHA review team consisted of D.W. Johnson, industrial hygienist and George Zagresy, retired senior safety consultant.
"To be eligible for the MSHARP, a company must meet several requirements and have significant employee involvement in the process," said Yoder. "Steel Industries has done just that, and in doing so, established an effective health and safety program."
The facility has an excellent system in place, which incorporates each of the seven required elements: hazard anticipation and detection; hazard prevention and control; planning and evaluation; administration and supervision; safety and health training; management leadership; and employee participation.
Some of Steel Industries, Inc.—Plant 5’s new improvements include revised incentive programs and making its safety data sheets training available online.
Safety News Links