BURLINGTON, WI – OSHA filed a settlement agreement with the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission between the agency and Cooperative Plus Inc., after the farmer-owned Wisconsin cooperative agreed to pay $550,000 in penalties, increase employee grain bin safety training and abate all safety issues at its grain handling facilities in Whitewater, Burlington, East Troy, and Genoa City.

“At least 26 workers were killed in grain entrapments nationwide last year, the highest number of any year since researchers started collecting data in 1978, but there are well-known safety practices that can be implemented to prevent these tragedies,” said Mike Connors, OSHA’s regional administrator in Chicago. “We are pleased to reach this agreement. The procedures and training that Cooperative Plus agreed to implement will ensure that these often deadly entrapments will not happen again.”

As part of the settlement agreement, Cooperative Plus will provide site-specific training for all employees exposed to potential hazards identified by OSHA’s grain handling, permit-required confined space, and lockout standards. The cooperative also will schedule confined space and bin entry rescue drills semiannually and provide 10 hours of training to newly hired and current employees whose duties expose them to potential hazards addressed by these standards.

Additionally, the cooperative will develop and implement a program to manage the risk of grain handling that includes safe methods to inspect grain and dislodge clumps of grain to empty the bin; develop lockout/tagout procedures for augers, conveyors and other equipment prior to bin entry; and develop engineering controls to abate hazards posed by bridged and castled grain. The company will audit work to ensure that all employees are properly trained in program rules and OSHA safety standards.

Finally, the company agreed to retain at least one independent safety consultant and to comply with OSHA follow-up inspections over a two-year period.OSHA cited Cooperative Plus Inc. for a total of 14 willful, 23 serious and two other-than-serious safety violations in August 2010 for lacking proper equipment and procedures, thereby exposing workers to the risk of being engulfed and suffocated in grain storage bins.

Since 2009, OSHA has fined grain operators in Wisconsin, Illinois, Colorado, South Dakota, Ohio, and Nebraska following preventable fatalities and injuries. In addition to enforcement actions and training, OSHA Assistant Secretary Dr. David Michaels sent a notification letter in August 2010 to grain elevator operators warning them not to allow workers to enter grain storage facilities without proper equipment. View a copy of the letter here.

Burlington-headquartered Cooperative Plus has locations throughout southeastern Wisconsin, including in Clinton, East Troy, Elkhorn, Genoa City, Union Grove, and Whitewater. The company has a combined member-ownership of more than 10,000 and annual sales of more than $50 million.

WICHITA, KS – OSHA cited Formation Plastics Inc. in Quinter, KS with one serious and three willful safety and health violations. An inspection was initiated after a worker was fatally crushed between a press mold and the machine’s outer structure in May.

“It is unthinkable that an employer would allow employees to work in and around dangerous equipment that lacked machine guarding as well as appropriate lockout/tagout procedures to control the energy source,” said Charles E. Adkins, OSHA’s regional administrator in Kansas City, MO. “All employers must take the necessary steps to eliminate hazards from the workplace.”

The willful violations, carrying $210,000 in proposed fines, address hazards associated with failing to develop and utilize energy control procedures, failing to train workers in energy control, and exposing workers to moving equipment parts. 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.

The serious violation, with a $7,000 fine, was cited for failing to provide point-of-operation guarding on a punch press. 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.

Proposed penalties total $217,000. Formation Plastics, a custom plastic parts manufacturer, has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director in Wichita, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

The citations can be viewed here.

Market Basket Store Failed to Call Emergency Services after Employee Fall Injury

CONCORD, NH – OSHA cited DeMoulas Supermarkets Inc., doing business as Market Basket, for 30 alleged willful, repeat and serious violations of workplace safety standards at its stores in Rindge and Concord, N.H. The Tewksbury, Mass., grocery chain, which has stores in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, faces a total of $589,200 in proposed fines, chiefly for recurring fall and laceration hazards and also for improperly responding to a worker’s serious injury.

“Employers with multiple locations have a responsibility to ensure safe and healthful working conditions at all of their workplaces,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “This employer has been cited for similar conditions at numerous other stores. Although those individual hazards were abated, this employer has not taken effective steps to correct these hazards across the board.”

The inspection of the Market Basket store in Rindge on U.S. Route 202 began after an employee sustained broken bones and head trauma on April 17 when he fell 11 feet to a concrete floor from an inadequately guarded storage mezzanine. Instead of calling for emergency help, store management lifted the injured worker from the floor, put him in a wheelchair and pushed him to the store’s receiving dock to wait for a relative to take him to the hospital. The Concord store inspection began May 16 after an OSHA supervisor observed the same type of fall hazard as the one at the Rindge store while shopping at the Market Basket store on Fort Eddy Road.

OSHA found that employees at both stores were exposed to falls from heights greater than 11 feet while working on top of produce coolers, freezers and storage lofts that lacked adequate guardrails. OSHA previously had cited DeMoulas for the same hazard at the Concord store as well as stores in Fitchburg, Lawrence and Tewksbury, Mass.

Employees who worked in the produce, deli and bakery departments at the Rindge and Concord stores also were exposed to laceration hazards from knives due to the grocery chain’s failure to conduct a hazard assessment and provide hand protection. DeMoulas previously was cited by OSHA for the same types of hazards at its Tewksbury and Westford, MA locations. Due to the company’s knowledge of the fall and laceration hazards and its systemic failure to correct them, OSHA cited four willful violations with $261,000 in proposed penalties. A willful violation exists when an employer has demonstrated either an intentional disregard for the requirements of the law or plain indifference to employee safety and health.

Additionally, DeMoulas Supermarkets has been cited for seven repeat violations with $225,500 in fines for hazardous conditions similar to those previously cited at its Ashland, Andover, Fitchburg, Salem, Tewksbury and Westford, Mass., locations. These citations encompass amputation hazards stemming from a lack of procedures, training and equipment to ensure that a meat saw and seafood cooler would not be activated while employees were cleaning them, as well as hazards from exposed portions of the saw’s blade; inadequate training of powered industrial truck operators; and a lack of bloodborne pathogen training for an employee required to clean equipment and work areas contaminated with human blood. 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.

Finally, the company has been cited for 19 serious violations with $102,700 in proposed penalties. One violation was cited under OSHA’s general duty clause for failing to contact emergency services and for moving the injured employee. The remaining 18 violations involve obstructed exit routes; a lack of eye and hand protection and an emergency eyewash for employees working with or near battery acid; a lack of chemical hazard communication training for workers; and other hazards related to electrical equipment, machine guarding and bloodborne pathogens. 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.

The citations can be viewed here.

http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/DemoulasSuperMarketsIncdbaMarketBasket_63192_1007_11.pdf

http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/DemoulasSuperMarketsIncdbaMarketBasket_29247_1007_11.pdf

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas – OSHA cited Corpus Christi Grain Co. in Corpus Christi for six willful and 20 serious violations with total proposed penalties of $258,900. OSHA’s Corpus Christi Area Office initiated its inspection at the company’s facility on Talbert Lane after it was reported that a worker was engulfed while emptying grain from a storage bin. The employee was rescued due to the exceptional efforts of the Corpus Christi Fire Department.

“Employees working in grain storage buildings are exposed to dangerous conditions, and proper safety measures must be taken,” said Michael Rivera, director of OSHA’s Corpus Christi office. “If OSHA’s standards were followed, it is possible this unfortunate incident could have been avoided.”

The willful violations include failing to provide personal protective equipment, such as a body harness and life line, for employees working with stored grain; perform lockout/tagout procedures for the energy sources of equipment, such as augers and conveyors, while workers are inside the grain bins; and have a competent attendant present with rescue equipment when workers enter grain storage bins. A willful violation is one committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for OSHA’s requirements or employee safety and health.

The serious violations include failing to ensure that employees are trained on the hazards associated with grain handling, cover openings with grates in grain bins, ensure that workroom floors are clear of combustible dust, and provide a preventive maintenance schedule for machinery. 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.

In addition to the agency’s enforcement actions to promote grain bin safety, OSHA Assistant Secretary Dr. David Michaels sent a notification letter in August 2010 and another in February 2011 to a total of more than 13,000 grain elevator operators warning them of proper safety precautions. These include prohibiting entry in grain storage facilities while grain is being emptied out or flowing in or out of the bin, prohibiting employees from “walking down the grain” and ensuring that employees enter the bin with the proper safety equipment.

Corpus Christi Grain, which employs about 25 workers, has 15 business days from receipt of citations to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director in Corpus Christi, or contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

View the citations here.

Kentucky OSHA for some time has had a different standard than Federal OSHA when it comes to the requirements for medical and first aid providers required in the workplace. In July 2011, Kentucky OSHA issued a new Instruction (#01-2011), explaining how it will interpret the Kentucky administrative regulation requiring most employers to have employees on duty who are trained in first aid. The regulation, 803 KAR §2:310, which was promulgated in 1989, states the following:

(1) Employers with eight (8) or more employees within the establishment shall have persons adequately trained to render first aid, and adequate first aid supplies shall be readily available. Outside salesmen, truck drivers, seasonal labor and others who, while performing their duties, are away from the premises more than fifty (50) percent of the time shall not be included in determining the number of employees.

(2) All other employers shall, in the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace which is used for the treatment of all injured employees, have a person or persons adequately trained to render first aid. Adequate first aid supplies shall be readily available.

This is a bit more descript than what Federal OSHA says involving the same issue. For those employers under the general industry requirements, 1910.151(b) states: “In the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace which is used for the treatment of all injured employees, a person or persons shall be adequately trained to render first aid. Adequate first aid supplies shall be readily available.”

For construction related employers, federal OSHA 1926.23 states: “First aid services and provisions for medical care shall be made available by the employer for every employee covered by these regulations. Regulations prescribing specific requirements for first aid, medical attention, and emergency facilities are contained in Subpart D of this part.”

Subpart D goes on to state in 1926.50(b): “Provisions shall be made prior to commencement of the project for prompt medical attention in case of serious injury.” Then in 1926.50(c) it states, “In the absence of an infirmary, clinic, hospital, or physician, that is reasonably accessible in terms of time and distance to the worksite, which is available for the treatment of injured employees, a person who has a valid certificate in first-aid training from the U.S. Bureau of Mines, the American Red Cross, or equivalent training that can be verified by documentary evidence, shall be available at the worksite to render first aid.”

Federal OSHA does not give a specific number of employees required to be in the workplace before its standard kicks in, and there are other documents that state emergency care must be available within no more than 3-4 minutes from the workplace. Therefore, to be in compliance, most employers are going to need to provide some level of in-house first responders. When Kentucky OSHA gives a total number of employees necessary to be in the workplace before their standard is required, they leave open the interpretation what the term “within the establishment” means.

In an earlier 1996 instruction, KY OSH instructed their compliance staff to count employees on all shifts when determining the number of employees within the establishment. Under this new interpretation KY OSH directs its staff to count only the number of employees per shift in determining if an employer is covered by the regulation. But what about two or more employers that may share an establishment? How does KY OSH count the number of employees in that establishment?

Our suggestion to all employers is to not split hairs here, but have a number of your employees trained in basic First Aid and CPR where you will always have someone on site that is capable of providing life saving techniques. It is a small investment for such an important issue.

FREEPORT, Texas – The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Texas Barge & Boat Inc. for one willful and 39 serious violations following the deaths of two workers from a fire at the company’s facility in Freeport, where boats and barges are repaired.

“It is critical that air monitoring is conducted when employees perform cutting operations in confined and enclosed spaces,” said Mark Briggs, director of OSHA’s Houston South Area Office. “This accident possibly could have been avoided if the company had followed OSHA’s standards.”

OSHA initiated a safety and health inspection on April 2 following a report from the local sheriff’s department that an explosion had occurred and two workers were missing at the company’s facility on East Floodgate Road. Nine employees were performing cutting and fire watch operations inside the hopper space, an area between the cargo hold and the bottom plate of the vessel, with limited means of entry and exit when the flash fire occurred.

The willful violation was cited for failing to conduct air monitoring tests prior to employees entering the confined and enclosed spaces to perform oxygen and fuel gas cutting operations. 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 involve failing to provide fall protection around the perimeter of the barge and around manholes, ensure compressed gas cylinders were secured, ensure proper electrical wiring was installed, ensure circuit breakers were labeled, provide respirator fit-testing, inspect oxygen and acetylene hoses, and develop a fire safety plan. 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.

Proposed penalties total $221,200. The citations can be viewed at: http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/TexasBarge-Boat-312928195-0929-11.pdf  and http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/TexasBarge-Boat-312927445-0929-11.pdf.

How Much Will This Cost Us?

Scenario:  You are the Safety Manager at a busy home design distribution operation.  One of the employees in the shipping/receiving department was moving a 50+ pound box when she felt a sharp pain in her groin.  The box was dropped and the glass vase in the box was broken beyond repair.  The employee was quickly taken to the company doctor and was diagnosed with a hernia.  Surgery was followed by six weeks of recuperation during which she could not work.

“So, how much is this going to cost us?”  Asked the frustrated Finance Director in a staff meeting.  You thought you came prepared:  “The medical costs are $14,491 according to all of the paperwork received.”  However, the Operations Manager exclaimed that the overtime cost of covering the injured worker’s job was through the roof.  You were asked to look at the situation again and quickly report back to the management group with the big picture of the injury’s cost.

Question: Where do you find help in determining the total cost of this injury?

Answer: You could go to the OSHA website for assistance and use an interactive program called $afety Pays that assists employers in estimating the total cost of occupational injuries and illnesses.  The website takes into consideration not only the direct costs (medical expenses like medicines, hospitalization, doctor expenses, rehabilitation, etc.) of an injury or illness, but also the indirect costs.

The Operations Manager expressed the indirect cost of covering the work time of the injured worker.  Some other indirect costs are:

• Wages paid to injured workers not covered by workers’ compensation
• Supervisors’ time following incidents
• Training replacement employees
• Lost productivity
• Cost of replacing damaged goods, machinery, etc. (vase price was $350)

The website is very user friendly and prompts you through a short series of questions.  Through this analysis, you will not only be able to estimate the direct and indirect costs of an injury/illness, but also see the impact to the company’s profitability by predicting the estimated sales needed to make up for these losses.  After using the $afety Pays Program, you may be able to return to your next meeting with a viable estimate of the company’s total cost of the injury and with a report to back up your information.

OSHA cites Marietta Industrial Enterprises in Marietta, Ohio for $186,000 after worker’s death at recycling facility.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Marietta Industrial Enterprises Inc., which operates Refuse Recycling in Marietta Ohio for 21 safety, including two willful, violations. OSHA opened an inspection after a worker was found dead inside the rotating drum assembly of a machine used to screen recyclables from other refuse on March 30.

“Marietta Industrial Enterprises showed an intentional disregard for employee safety by failing to provide lockout/tagout training to workers performing maintenance inside rotating drums, which could easily be restarted if their energy sources were not properly cut off,” said Deborah Zubaty, OSHA’s area director in Columbus. “No one should ever lose his or her life because safety procedures were not followed. It is the employer’s responsibility to train workers and ensure that the workplace is free from unnecessary hazards.”

Two willful violations involve failing to implement lockout/tagout procedures to prevent equipment from becoming unexpectedly energized and to train workers in lockout/tagout procedures. 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.

Additionally, 14 serious violations involve failing to provide machine guarding, provide adequate guardrails, mark and illuminate emergency and exit signs, evaluate the workplace to determine if there were any confined spaces that would require permits, examine powered industrial trucks prior to each shift, ensure that employees used electrical protective equipment, provide electrically insulated tools, develop an exposure control plan for bloodborne pathogens, offer hepatitis B vaccines and label biohazard containers. 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, five other-than-serious violations involve using work areas for storage, as well as failing to record work-related injuries, maintain clean conditions, provide a written respiratory protection program and provide employees with information for voluntary respirator use. 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 injury.

As a result of the investigation, Marietta Industrial Enterprises has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program. Initiated in June 2010, SVEP is intended to focus on recalcitrant employers that endanger workers by committing willful, repeat or failure-to-abate violations in one or more of the following circumstances: a fatality or catastrophe, industry operations or processes that expose workers to severe occupational hazards, employee exposure to hazards related to the potential releases of highly hazardous chemicals and all per-instance citation (egregious) enforcement actions. For more information on SVEP, visit http://www.osha.gov/dep/svep-directive.pdf*.

Proposed penalties total $186,300. The citations can be viewed at: http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/MARIETTA_INDUSTRIAL_ENTERPRISES_314593690_0922_11.pdf

US Labor Department’s OSHA cites 50 safety violations, proposes $917,000 in fines against Bostik Inc. following Middleton, Massachusetts explosion.

Federal OSHA has cited Bostik Inc. for 50 alleged violations of workplace safety standards following a March 13 explosion at the company’s Middleton plant in which four workers were injured. The adhesives manufacturer faces a total of $917,000 in proposed fines.

According to OSHA their inspection identified several serious deficiencies in the company’s process safety management program.. In this case, the chemical was acetone, used in a PSM-covered process known as direct solvation. On the day of the explosion, a valve on a transfer line inadvertently was left open, resulting in the release of flammable acetone vapors. The vapors exploded after being ignited by an undetermined source.

“The requirements of OSHA’s PSM standard are stringent and comprehensive because the stakes are so high,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels. “Failure to evaluate, anticipate, address and prevent hazardous conditions associated with a process can result in a catastrophic incident such as an explosion.”

“In this case, Bostik knew from prior third party and internal compliance audits conducted at the plant that aspects of its PSM program were incomplete or inadequate, and misclassified electrical equipment was in use. The company did not take adequate steps to address those conditions,” said Jeffrey A. Erskine, OSHA’s area director for northeastern Massachusetts. “Luckily, the explosion happened when there were few workers in the plant. Otherwise, this incident could have resulted in a catastrophic loss of life.”

Specifically, OSHA found that the process safety information for the solvation process was incomplete. The employer’s analysis of hazards related to the process did not address previous incidents with a potential for catastrophic results, such as forklifts that struck process equipment, and did not address human factors such as operator error, communication between shift changes and employee fatigue from excessive overtime. In addition, the company did not ensure that a forklift and electrical equipment, such as a light fixture, switches and a motor, were approved for use in Class 1 hazardous locations where flammable gases or vapors are present.

As a result, OSHA has issued Bostik nine willful citations, with $630,000 in proposed fines, for these conditions. There were an additional 41 serious citations issued, with $287,000 in fines, for a range of other conditions, including an incomplete and deficient emergency response plan, inadequate training for employees required to fight fires, obstructed exit access and electrical hazards, and additional PSM deficiencies.

The Bostik Inc. citations are available at http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/Bostik_Inc_315298281.pdf  and http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/Bostik_Inc_315298307.pdf

September 9, 2011
Contact: Office of Communications
Phone: 202-693-1999

OSHA issues 2011 annual inspection plan for protecting workers in high-hazard workplaces
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued its annual inspection plan under the Site-Specific Targeting 2011 (SST-11) program to help the agency direct enforcement resources to high-hazard workplaces where the highest rates of injuries and illnesses occur.

The SST program is OSHA’s main programmed inspection plan for non-construction workplaces that have 20 or more workers. High-hazard workplaces identified in the SST program reported above-average work-related injury and illness rates, based on data collected from a 2010 OSHA Data Initiative survey of 80,000 larger establishments in selected high-hazard industries. Establishments are randomly selected for inspection from a primary list of 3,700 manufacturing, non-manufacturing, and nursing and personal care facilities.

“By focusing our inspection resources on employers in high hazard industries who endanger their employees, we can prevent injuries and illnesses and save lives,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA David Michaels. “Through the SST program we examine all major aspects of these operations to determine the effectiveness of their safety and health efforts.”

Two changes have been made to this year’s SST program. In 2010, only those establishments in the selected industries with 40 or more employees were subject to inspections under the SST plan; this year, that number has been reduced to 20 or more. An evaluation study measuring the program’s impact on future compliance with OSHA standards has also been introduced for the 2011 program.

In addition to the SST program, OSHA implements both national and local emphasis inspection programs to target high-risk hazards and industries. OSHA currently has 14 National Emphasis Programs that intensify inspections related to amputations, lead, crystalline silica, shipbreaking, trenching/excavations, petroleum refinery process safety management, process safety management covered chemical facilities, hexavalent chromium, diacetyl, recordkeeping, federal agencies, air traffic control tower monitoring, primary metals and combustible dust. OSHA also has approximately 140 Regional and Local Emphasis Programs (REPs and LEPs).

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to ensure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.