osha update -- june 2011 richard e. fairfax, cih deputy assistant secretary occupational safety and...

OSHA Update -- June OSHA Update -- June 20112011

Richard E. Fairfax, CIHRichard E. Fairfax, CIH

Deputy Assistant SecretaryDeputy Assistant Secretary

Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationOccupational Safety and Health Administration

FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Inspections ConductedInspections Conducted

39,324 38,667 39,004 40,993

25,121

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% Programmed vs. % Unprogrammed% Programmed vs. % Unprogrammed

59%

41%

60%

40%

62%

38%

60%

40%

58%

42%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Programmed Unprogrammed

FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% Complaint Inspections% Complaint Inspections

18% 17% 17% 20% 21%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% Inspections In-Compliance% Inspections In-Compliance

26% 23% 25% 23% 21%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Total Violations IssuedTotal Violations Issued

88,846 87,210 87,66396,742

56,947

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Total Violations Issued as SeriousTotal Violations Issued as Serious

76% 77% 77% 77% 73%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% Total Violations Issued as SWR% Total Violations Issued as SWR

79% 81% 81% 82% 78%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% NIC Inspections with only OTS % NIC Inspections with only OTS

ViolationsViolations

11% 10% 10% 10% 11%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% of Inspections Contested% of Inspections Contested

7% 7% 7% 8% 8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Average Penalty /Serious ViolationAverage Penalty /Serious Violation

$918 $998 $970 $1,053

$2,116

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011% Construction Inspections% Construction Inspections

59% 60% 61% 60%55%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Significant InspectionsSignificant Inspections

107121 120

164

132

0

40

80

120

160

200


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Egregious CasesEgregious Cases

35

4

20

9

0

5

10

15

20

25


FY 2007 – FY 2011FY 2007 – FY 2011Fatality InspectionsFatality Inspections

1,043936

797 804

434

0

250

500

750

1,000

1,250


Top Ten General Industry ViolationsTop Ten General Industry Violations

1.1. Hazard Hazard CommunicationCommunication

2.2. Respiratory Respiratory ProtectionProtection

3.3. Lockout/TagoutLockout/Tagout4.4. Electrical, Wiring Electrical, Wiring

MethodsMethods5.5. Powered Industrial Powered Industrial

TrucksTrucks

6.6. Electrical, General Electrical, General RequirementsRequirements

7.7. Machine GuardingMachine Guarding8.8. RecordkeepingRecordkeeping9.9. Personal Protective Personal Protective

Equipment Equipment 10.10.Mechanical Power-Mechanical Power-

Transmission Transmission ApparatusApparatus

Top Ten Construction ViolationsTop Ten Construction Violations

1.1. ScaffoldingScaffolding2.2. Fall ProtectionFall Protection3.3. LaddersLadders4.4. Fall Protection, Fall Protection,

Training Training RequirementsRequirements


6.6. General Safety & General Safety & Health ProvisionsHealth Provisions

7.7. Head ProtectionHead Protection8.8. Aerial LiftsAerial Lifts9.9. Eye & Face Eye & Face

ProtectionProtection10.10.Excavation, Excavation,

Specific Specific Excavation Excavation RequirementsRequirements

FY 2011 – Top 10 Serious ViolationsFY 2011 – Top 10 Serious Violations

1.1. ScaffoldingScaffolding

2.2. Fall ProtectionFall Protection


4.4. Lockout/TagoutLockout/Tagout

5.5. Electrical, Wiring Electrical, Wiring MethodsMethods

6.6. LaddersLadders

7.7. Powered Industrial Powered Industrial TrucksTrucks

8.8. Machine GuardingMachine Guarding

9.9. Respiratory Respiratory ProtectionProtection

10.10.Electrical, General Electrical, General RequirementsRequirements

FY 2011 – Top 10 Willful ViolationsFY 2011 – Top 10 Willful Violations

1.1. Excavation, Excavation, Protective SystemsProtective Systems

2.2. Fall ProtectionFall Protection3.3. Grain Handling Grain Handling

FacilitiesFacilities4.4. Process Safety Process Safety

ManagementManagement5.5. AsbestosAsbestos

6.6. Recordkeeping, Recordkeeping, General Recording General Recording CriteriaCriteria

7.7. Lockout/TagoutLockout/Tagout8.8. Safeguards for Safeguards for

Personnel Personnel ProtectionProtection

9.9. LeadLead10.10.Recordkeeping, Recordkeeping,

Recording CriteriaRecording Criteria

FY 2011 – Top 10 PSM ViolationsFY 2011 – Top 10 PSM Violations

1.1. 1910.119 J – Mechanical Integrity1910.119 J – Mechanical Integrity2.2. 1910.119 D – Process Safety Information1910.119 D – Process Safety Information3.3. 1910.119 F – Operating Procedures1910.119 F – Operating Procedures4.4. 1910.119 E – Process Hazards Analysis1910.119 E – Process Hazards Analysis5.5. 1910.119 L – Management of Change1910.119 L – Management of Change6.6. 1910.119 G – Training1910.119 G – Training7.7. 1910.119 O – Compliance Audits1910.119 O – Compliance Audits8.8. 1910.119 H – Contractors1910.119 H – Contractors9.9. 1910.119 I – Pre-Startup Review1910.119 I – Pre-Startup Review10.10. 1910.119 M – Incident Investigation1910.119 M – Incident Investigation

Stuff in the WorksStuff in the Works

FOIA Manuals – Whistleblower and FOIA Manuals – Whistleblower and EnforcementEnforcement

GHSGHS Referral system for inadequate MSDSReferral system for inadequate MSDS

SVEP - Serious Violators Inspection SVEP - Serious Violators Inspection ProgramProgram


NOISENOISE Current policy: 1983 interpretation and current FOM policy Current policy: 1983 interpretation and current FOM policy

CSHO must conduct a cost estimation of a hearing conservation CSHO must conduct a cost estimation of a hearing conservation program (HCP) and of engineering controls. program (HCP) and of engineering controls.

TrainingTraining We have estimated the cost of a HCP for a large company to be $310-We have estimated the cost of a HCP for a large company to be $310-

320 per employee per year and for a smaller company the numbers 320 per employee per year and for a smaller company the numbers aren't in but we are hearing about $600/per year/employee. aren't in but we are hearing about $600/per year/employee.

Stakeholder MeetingStakeholder Meeting

Public commentsPublic comments

New Noise WebsiteNew Noise Website


SVEP: SVEP: As May 31, 2011, DEP has logged:As May 31, 2011, DEP has logged:

149 SVEP cases 149 SVEP cases 27 (18 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are fatalities 27 (18 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are fatalities 101 (68 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are Non-fatality/Catastrophe Related 101 (68 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are Non-fatality/Catastrophe Related

to a High-Emphasis Hazardto a High-Emphasis Hazard 1 (.7 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are Non-fatality/Catastrophe for PSM1 (.7 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are Non-fatality/Catastrophe for PSM

93 (63 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are in construction93 (63 %) of the 149 SVEP cases are in construction 9 (10 %) of the 93 SVEP construction cases are fatalities 9 (10 %) of the 93 SVEP construction cases are fatalities

Number of SVEP cases that are egregious cases: 20 (14 %) of Number of SVEP cases that are egregious cases: 20 (14 %) of 149 SVEP cases 149 SVEP cases

Stuff in the WorksStuff in the WorksSVEPSVEP In addition, there have been:In addition, there have been:

4 Follow-up inspections4 Follow-up inspections 13 General Industry- Related inspections, 1 of which was also an SVEP 13 General Industry- Related inspections, 1 of which was also an SVEP 1 Construction-Related inspection1 Construction-Related inspection

The Regional Offices also reported:The Regional Offices also reported: 15 enhanced settlement agreement 15 enhanced settlement agreement 20 company headquarters were sent copies of citations and/or notified20 company headquarters were sent copies of citations and/or notified 0 Section 11(b) case referred to SOL or filed with the courts0 Section 11(b) case referred to SOL or filed with the courts

Size of Employers (size based on # of employees controlled)Size of Employers (size based on # of employees controlled) 73 employers had 73 employers had 1-25 employees1-25 employees, , 49 % 49 % of the SVEPsof the SVEPs 35 employers had 35 employers had 26-100 employees26-100 employees, , 24 %24 % of the SVEPs of the SVEPs 13 employers had 13 employers had 101-250 employees101-250 employees, , 9 %9 % of the SVEPs of the SVEPs 27 employers had 27 employers had 251 employees or greater251 employees or greater, , 1818 %% of the SVEPs of the SVEPs


SVEPSVEP Removal from te SVEP - Removal from te SVEP -


Directives:Directives: Workplace ViolenceWorkplace Violence

Family Fatality Family Fatality CSHO TrainingCSHO Training

PyrotechnicsPyrotechnics


CSAsCSAs Status of Directive – with Assistant Secretary for signatureStatus of Directive – with Assistant Secretary for signature

Major Changes include:Major Changes include: Clarifies the distinction between National and Regional CSAsClarifies the distinction between National and Regional CSAs OSHA may initiate negotiation of CSAOSHA may initiate negotiation of CSA Broadens the scope of enforcement issues appropriate for a CSA (no longer Broadens the scope of enforcement issues appropriate for a CSA (no longer

only egregious)only egregious)

Current NegotiationsCurrent Negotiations SunocoSunoco USPSUSPS BPBP CVSCVS


PenaltiesPenalties Continues to closely monitor metrics captured by Continues to closely monitor metrics captured by

IMISIMIS

Completing manual data collection to compare Completing manual data collection to compare impact of penalty changes between FY 10 and impact of penalty changes between FY 10 and FY 11FY 11

Challenges moving forward:Challenges moving forward: Other OSHA policy changes impacting settlement Other OSHA policy changes impacting settlement

negotiationsnegotiations


New NEPsNew NEPs Health CaseHealth Case Metals (Just released)Metals (Just released) IsocyanatesIsocyanates

Issues with NEPsIssues with NEPs How many is enoughHow many is enough Should they have a sunset clauseShould they have a sunset clause Should our strategy changeShould our strategy change


InitiativesInitiatives Grain (will continue)Grain (will continue) Heat stressHeat stress Under represented workersUnder represented workers


Social mediaSocial media AppsApps Customer service projectCustomer service project Click and fixClick and fix

ERGOERGO

StandardsStandards

Backing Operations – RFI, August Backing Operations – RFI, August 20112011

Backing vehicles and equipment are common causes of Backing vehicles and equipment are common causes of

struck-by injuries and can also cause caught between struck-by injuries and can also cause caught between injuries when backing vehicles and equipment pin a injuries when backing vehicles and equipment pin a worker against something else. worker against something else.

OSHA is seeking comment on technological and non OSHA is seeking comment on technological and non

technological solutions to prevent back over incidents.technological solutions to prevent back over incidents.

StandardsStandards

Consensus Standards-Consensus Standards-Acetylene – DFR, August 2011Acetylene – DFR, August 2011

Construction Confined Spaces – Construction Confined Spaces – Final – Fall 2011Final – Fall 2011

StandardsStandards

Cranes & Derricks-Underground & Cranes & Derricks-Underground & Demolition – DFR, August 2011 Demolition – DFR, August 2011 The final rule for Cranes & Derricks was The final rule for Cranes & Derricks was

issued on August 9th, 2010. This DFR will issued on August 9th, 2010. This DFR will ensure that the Cranes & Derricks standard is ensure that the Cranes & Derricks standard is applied to subsectors of construction work, applied to subsectors of construction work, demolition, and underground construction that demolition, and underground construction that were previously exempted from coverage.were previously exempted from coverage.

StandardsStandards

HazCom/GHS – Final, August 2011 HazCom/GHS – Final, August 2011 This final rule modifies the current HCS to align with This final rule modifies the current HCS to align with

the provisions of the United Nations’ (UN) Globally the provisions of the United Nations’ (UN) Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). The modifications to the HCS will Chemicals (GHS). The modifications to the HCS will improve the quality and consistency of information improve the quality and consistency of information provided to employers and employees regarding provided to employers and employees regarding chemical hazards by providing harmonized criteria for chemical hazards by providing harmonized criteria for classifying and labeling classifying and labeling

StandardsStandards

Infectious Diseases, Stakeholder Infectious Diseases, Stakeholder Meeting, July 2011Meeting, July 2011

Injury and Illness Prevention Program, Injury and Illness Prevention Program, SBREFA, June 2011SBREFA, June 2011

SIPs III – Final – Published June 8th, SIPs III – Final – Published June 8th, 20112011

StandardsStandards

Reinforced Concrete – ANPRM, Reinforced Concrete – ANPRM, June 2011June 2011 Current rules regarding reinforcing steel and post-tensioning Current rules regarding reinforcing steel and post-tensioning

activities do not adequately address worker hazards in work activities do not adequately address worker hazards in work related to post-tensioning and reinforcing steel. related to post-tensioning and reinforcing steel.

OSHA is seeking public comment on Post-tensioning and OSHA is seeking public comment on Post-tensioning and Reinforcing Steel from professionals who work in the post-Reinforcing Steel from professionals who work in the post-tensioning and reinforcing steel field and will consider tensioning and reinforcing steel field and will consider rulemaking to prevent worker deaths and injuries related to rulemaking to prevent worker deaths and injuries related to these operations. these operations.

OSHA hopes to determine whether a new rule is necessary, OSHA hopes to determine whether a new rule is necessary, and, if so, what hazards need to be addressed.and, if so, what hazards need to be addressed.

QUESTIONSQUESTIONS??????????????

osha update -- june 2011 richard e. fairfax, cih deputy assistant secretary occupational safety and...

Documents

svep construction cases

svep cases stuff

general requirementsfy

construction inspectionsfy

inspections contestedfy

nic inspections

inspections conductedfy

total violations issuedfy