Scenario: To celebrate a safety milestone of achieving one million hours worked without an injury, your employer provides a lunch complete with fried chicken, barbequed ribs, hamburgers, and all the trimmings. A few hours later many employees start to exhibit signs of food poisoning. Seventy two of your employees get food poisoning so bad that they must miss the next day of work. Further investigation reveals they received the food poisoning from the potato salad provided by the caterer your company hired for the event.
Question: Do all seventy two of these cases go on your OSHA 300 log as recordable with at least one day away from work (DART case)?
Answer: A note to the exception involving geographical presumption makes clear that if an employee becomes ill as a result of ingesting food contaminated by workplace contaminants such as lead, or contracts food poisoning from food items provided by the employer, the case would be considered work-related. As a result, if an employee contracts food poisoning from a sandwich brought from home or purchased in the company cafeteria and must take time off to recover, the case is not considered work related. On the other hand, if an employee contracts food poisoning from a meal provided by the employer at a business meeting or company function and takes time off to recover, the case would be considered work related. Food provided or supplied by the employer does not include food purchased by the employee from the company cafeteria, but does include food purchased by the employer from the company cafeteria for business meetings or other company functions.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Fluke Corporation announced a voluntary recall of the Fluke VoltAlert® Voltage Detector. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
There are about 33,000 units involved in this recall. The testers can fail to give an indication of live voltage, resulting in the operator falsely believing the electrical power is off, posing a risk of serious injury or death from electrical shock or thermal burns.
The Fluke voltage testers look like a pen with a yellow, white and gray body. The testers measure 90 to 1000 volts alternating current (VAC). “Fluke” and the model number are printed on the front of each unit. The recall involves Fluke 1AC-A1-I VoltAlert® tester with the following model and item numbers:
1AC-AI FLUKE-1AC-I VoltAlert Voltage Tester
These items are sold at Industrial distributors and electrical wholesalers nationwide from September 2009 through February 2010 for about $25.
Consumers should stop using the recalled product immediately and contact Fluke for a free replacement. For additional information, contact Fluke toll-free at (888) 983-5853 between 7 a.m. and 4 p.m. PT Monday through Friday or visit the firm’s Web site at www.fluke.com/1AC-A1recall.
Federal OSHA has cited the Allen Family Foods Inc. poultry processing facility in Harbeson Delaware for exposing workers to a variety of workplace safety hazards. Proposed penalties total $182,200.
OSHA initiated an investigation on Sept. 9, 2009, in response to a referral made by Maryland Occupational Safety and Health after numerous serious and willful violations were issued at a similar processing facility in Maryland.
OSHA has cited the company with 45 serious violations and proposed a penalty of $182,000, and two other-than-serious violations with a proposed penalty of $200. The serious violations address hazards with industrial trucks, falls, personal protective equipment, machine guarding, electrical hazards, process safety management, respirators and emergency response.
“It is vital that the company abate these hazards as quickly as possible to ensure that safety and health of workers at that facility are not at risk,” said Domenick Salvatore, director of OSHA’s Wilmington, Del., office.
The Maryland inspection netted three proposed “willful” violations involving Lockout/Tagout and machine guarding. Proposed penalties of $109,750.
In March a letter went out to about 15,000 workplaces notifying then that they have with the highest numbers of injuries and illnesses resulting in days away from work, restricted work activities or job transfers, known as the DART rate.
OSHA identified businesses with the nation’s highest rates of workplace injuries and illnesses through employer-reported data from a 2009 survey of about 100,000 worksites. (This survey collected injury and illness data for calendar year 2008.) Workplaces receiving notifications had DART rates more than twice the national average among all U.S. workplaces.
Employers receiving the letters also were provided copies of their injury and illness data, along with a list of the most frequently cited OSHA standards for their specific industry. The letter offered assistance in helping to reduce workplace injuries and illnesses by suggesting, among other things, the use of OSHA’s free safety and health consultation services for small businesses provided through the states. The letter goes on to state that it is likely OSHA will target up to 4,500 (30%) of the establishments identified in the survey for inspection in the next year.
“Receipt of this letter means that workers in that particular establishment are being injured at a higher rate than in most other businesses of its kind in the country,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “Employers whose businesses have injury and illness rates this high need to take immediate steps to protect their workers.”
COMPUSPAR USA Inc. has been cited again by OSHA for failing to abate previously cited workplace safety and health violations. Penalties total $101,700.
OSHA initiated its investigation on Sept. 15, 2009, to determine the abatement status of previously identified hazards. As a result of the investigation, the company has been cited with four failure to abate violations with a penalty of $83,400. The company also has been cited for six repeat violations with a penalty of $11,400; six serious violations with a penalty of $6,900; and one other-than-serious violation, which carries no penalty.
“The company’s refusal to abate these violations leaves its employees exposed to a variety of hazards and at risk of injury and illness,” said Jean Kulp, area director of OSHA’s Allentown office. “It is imperative that COMPUSPAR take all necessary steps to remove these hazards to ensure the safety and health of workers at the Allentown facility.”
The failure to abate citations address the company’s failure to maintain OSHA 300 logs for two years; to develop and implement a hazard communication program; to train employees on hazardous chemicals; and to develop and implement a respiratory protection program. The repeat violations include the company’s failure to maintain a material safety data sheet for hazardous chemicals used in the spray painting operation; failure to cover flammable liquids; use of unapproved electrical equipment in hazardous locations; lack of proper ventilation in a spray booth and the lack of cleanliness of the spray area. OSHA issues a repeat violation when an employer previously was cited for the same or similar violation of any standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facilities in federal enforcement states within the last three years.
The serious violations are due to the company’s failure to properly label a drum containing hazardous chemicals; failure to properly guard machinery; improper use of electric boxes and the use of a power strip as an alternative to fixed wiring.
COMPUSPAR USA Inc. repairs and reworks electronic and electromechanical equipment, and employs 76 workers at its Allentown Pennsylvania site.
OREGON, Ohio — The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited BP North American Inc. and BP-Husky Refining LLC’s refinery in Oregon, Ohio, with 42 alleged willful violations, including 39 on a per-instance basis, and 20 alleged serious violations for exposing workers to a variety of hazards including failure to provide adequate pressure relief for process units. Proposed penalties total $3,042,000.
“OSHA has found that BP often ignored or severely delayed fixing known hazards in its refineries,” said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. “There is no excuse for taking chances with people’s lives. BP must fix the hazards now.”
OSHA began its inspection at the refinery located near Toledo, Ohio, in September 2009 as part of the agency’s Refinery National Emphasis Program and as a follow-up to a 2006 inspection and a 2007 settlement agreement between OSHA and BP at this location. Although the 2009 inspection found that BP had complied with the settlement agreement, OSHA found numerous violations at the plant not previously covered by the agreement.
The inspection revealed that workers were exposed to serious injury and death in the event of a release of flammable and explosive materials in the refinery because of numerous conditions constituting violations of OSHA’s process safety management standard. OSHA has issued willful citations for numerous failures to provide adequate pressure relief for process units, failures to provide safeguards to prevent the hazardous accumulation of fuel in process heaters, and exposing workers to injury and death from collapse of or damage, in the event of a fire, to nine buildings in the refinery. Additional willful citations allege various other violations of OSHA’s standard addressing process safety management. These citations carry proposed penalties totaling $2,940,000.
The serious citations address a variety of other hazards, including violations of other requirements of the process safety management standard. These carry proposed penalties totaling $102,000.
Since 1991, this refinery has been inspected 12 times. Nationally, BP Products North American has been inspected by OSHA 44 times at various sites and is facing pending cases in which 439 willful citations and failure-to-abate notices were issued to its Texas City Refinery as a result of a 2009 inspection. Proposed penalties in those pending cases total $87 million, the largest penalties by far ever proposed by OSHA. BP’s Texas City Refinery experienced a devastating explosion and fire in 2005 that killed 15 workers and injured 170. A large portion of the penalties proposed for the Texas City Refinery results from OSHA’s allegations that BP failed to fully live up to a settlement agreement entered into after the explosion. BP has contested the citations, notifications of failure-to-abate and the proposed penalties in those cases.
BP North American Inc. operates and jointly owns the refinery with Canadian-based Husky Energy Inc. The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an information conference with the OSHA area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
Toledo Refinery Citations and Proposed Penalties
Forty-two willful citations with proposed penalties totaling $2,940,000 are proposed as follows:
1. Thirty-eight (38) per-instance, willful citations with penalties totaling $2,660,000 allege as follows:
a. Twenty-six instances allege deficient pressure relief, a violation of 29 CFR parts 1910.119(d)(3) and 1910.119(j)(5), with total penalties of $1,820,000;
b. Three instances allege the lack of flame-out protection on heaters and a furnace, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3), with total penalties of $210,000; and
c. Nine instances allege facility-siting hazards, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(e)(5), with total penalties of $630,000.
2. Four willful citations with penalties totaling $280,000, allege as follows:
a. Lack of pressure vessel information, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3), with a penalty of $70,000;
b. Cross-connections between fire-emergency water supplies and process systems, a violation of 29 CFR parts 1910.119(d)(3) and 1910.119(e)(5), with a penalty of $70,000;
c. Failure to conduct thickness measurements at designated test sites and as required at the flare header, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(ii), with a penalty of $70,000; and
d. Failure to conduct thickness measurements in accordance with RAGAGEP, a violation of 29 CFR 1910.119(j)(4)(iii), with a penalty of $70,000.
Twenty serious citations with total penalties of $102,000 allege the following failures: to support pipes properly; to maintain heat transfer information for refractory-lined vessels; to assure the accuracy of P&IDs, the maintenance of pressure vessel nameplates, and proper documentation of pressure relief design information; to document implementation of the vessel grounding program; to assure that car-sealing practices were used for intervening valves; to password protect safety instrumented systems; to assure that PHAs addressed combustion safeguards, pressure relief, and human factors, and reflected updated layer of protection analysis and safety integrity levels; to establish and to implement a written program for refinery valve car-seal procedures; to consult employees on the frequency of refresher training; to implement procedures for operating limits changes and other matters; to investigate contamination of the fire-water system; to include contributing factors and recommendations in accident investigation reports; to audit a statistically significant number of pressure vessels, piping and instrument controls during compliance audits; to assure that LOTO procedures were implemented during burner maintenance; to assure that LOTO devices were applied during service and maintenance; and to assure that electric lighting equipment was appropriate for hazardous atmosphere classifications.
The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Hua Sheng International Group Corp. in Barrigada, Guam, for $139,500 in proposed penalties for hazardous working and living conditions at a jobsite and barracks in Harmon, Guam.
“The failure of employers to provide clean water to workers they are required to house can lead to serious infections and dehydration,” said Ken Nishiyama Atha, OSHA’s regional administrator in San Francisco. “We are vigorously enforcing the standards for adequate housing and safety for all workers, including H-2B temporary workers, especially as construction and other industries ramp up in support of the planned relocation of Marine Corps personnel and their dependents from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam.
OSHA has cited the company for one alleged willful violation and 28 alleged serious violations. The willful violation is for failing to provide workers with an adequate water supply for drinking, cooking, bathing, flushing and laundry. The proposed penalty for the willful violation is $70,000. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements or with plain indifference to employee safety and health.
The serious violations are for safety and health hazards related to poor living conditions at the employees’ barracks as well as at the worksite. Some include failing to maintain the fire alarm system; maintain toilet rooms in sanitary condition; install cooking and heating equipment to meet local ordinances codes and regulations; provide proper food-handling facilities and garbage containers; and provide first aid facilities and maintain a trained first aid person. The proposed penalty for the serious violations is $69,500 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.
OSHA cited this company six times in the two years prior to this inspection. Four of the inspections resulted in a total of nine serious violations.
Company Sponsored Meal
