Environmental Health and Safety Blog | EHSWire

Paula Kaufmann, CIH

Did you know that the OSHA Illness and Injury Summary Log, 300A, is used for more than just recordkeeping at your site?  By documenting your company’s illness and injuries properly, you shape OSHA’s future initiatives!  Specifically, OSHA Summary 300A Forms are gathered by the OSHA Data Initiative (ODI) to help direct OSHA programs and measure its own performance.  

How does OSHA get this information?

OSHA gets these data from two sources:

• As part of an annual survey, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) sends injury and illness survey forms to randomly selected employers and uses the information to create the Nation's occupational injury and illness statistics.


• The OSHA Data Initiative mails its annual survey (in June) that collects data on injuries and acute illnesses attributable to work-related activities in private-sector industries from approximately 80,000 establishments in selected high hazard industries. In 2010, OSHA also collected this information from approximately 20,000 establishments in the construction industry in addition to the non-construction establishments. The Agency uses these data to calculate establishment-specific injury/illness rates, and in combination with other data sources, to target enforcement and compliance assistance activities. Traditionally, OSHA collects data from the establishments that meet the following categories, but as we saw in 2010, OSHA can expand these criteria.
  
  
  
  • Non-construction industries with 40 or more employees are chosen randomly
  
  
  • Non-respondents in the previous collection year
  
  
  • Site with an inspection or consultation visit for performance measurement
  
  
  • DART rate (days away from work, restriction or transfer) of 7.0 or higher in previous data collection
  
  
  
  

Does the data really help OSHA?

Now that OSHA has the data from BLS and the ODI, the Agency uses the information to

• Calculate and establish specific injury and illness incidence rates


• Develop targeted intervention programs (i.e., inspections and enforcement action)


• Assist inspectors so that they can direct their efforts to the higher incidents hazards that are hurting workers.


• Measure the success of agency efforts to reduce the number of workplace injuries and illnesses in select high-hazard industries


• Provide the base data for the BLS Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, the Nation's primary source of occupational injury and illness data.

What is your role?

Be a savvy and educated reporter of your company’s illness and injury information. Understanding the OSHA 300 log reporting requirements will ensure an accurate portrayal of worker health and safety as well as maintaining OSHA compliance. Can you answer the following questions?

• How do I complete the OSHA 300 Log and Form 301?


• Am I required to post an OSHA Form 300A ? How do I know if I am exempt? 


• What is classified as a work-related illness or injury? 


• How do I fill the forms in correctly without over-reporting?


• Do I have to fill in the form if I have no recordable injuries or illnesses in the previous year? What are the rules for posting?


• Once the form is filled in and submitted, if requested by BLS or OSHA, are there other legal requirements I should know?

Not convinced that recordkeeping is important?

Besides providing a visible record of worker safety benchmarks and improvements (or worse, tragedies and reversals), establishments that are requested to but fail to submit a completed data collection form may be subject to OSHA enforcement actions, including the issuance of a citation and assessment of penalties!  So, take the time understand OSHA’s reporting requirements and implement them correctly – it affects your company and the nation’s workers.

If you need assistance with OSHA recordkeeping, Emilcott offers a variety of ways to help your business stay in compliance from a webinar-based course that outlines the rules and regulations to the development of complete health and safety plans. Or, if you have an OSHA recordkeeping question, just ask us!

Read More

Topics: Emilcott, OSHA, health and safety, General Industry H&S, OSHA Compliance, General EHS, Construction H&S, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Webinar, reporting, regulation, Medical Records, BLS, Bureau of Labor Statistics

By Chuck Peruffo

It was a few days before Christmas and I was working outdoors as an Industrial Hygiene Technician on a construction project.  This is the first time in my life I have worked at such cold temperatures as I have been a Lab Rat most of my career.   Not being “climate adjusted”, I was bundled up like Ralphie’s little brother, Randy, from A Christmas Story.   As I kept one eye on my meters and the other eye trained on the excavator in front of me, the wind started to pick up.  The clouds of dust coming off the road shouted “dust control needed” even before I checked the numbers on the dust monitors.

Dust control is an important way to keep what’s in the ground out of the air and out of your lungs.  The standard method for controlling dust is to spray water on the ground. This practice works fine until your water truck freezes solid.  So, what do you do when Jack Frost is nipping at your nose and the dust is flying in the air?  Your solution for dust control is to make up a solution of water and a chemical such as magnesium chloride hexahydrate (“Mag flake”).  

Mag flake or Mag brine has long been used to control dust on rural roads.  Mag flake can be mixed directly into your water truck.  A bit of a disclaimer:  although Mag brine is less corrosive that sodium chloride, make sure the water truck tank vessel can handle the solution by noting the material of manufacture and then consulting a corrosion guide. And, it is good practice to flush the tank truck with clean water after use.

Some manufacturers sell Mag brine at up to a 33% solution for dust control. That translates into more than 2 ½ tons of Magnesium Chloride in a 2000 gallon water truck which is fine for dust control on rural roads that aren’t sprayed often but may be too concentrated for a construction site application. 

At Emilcott, we have found a solution to meet the challenge of frozen water.  Roughly, a 50 pound bag of magnesium chloride added to a 2000 gallon water truck lowers the freezing temperature by 0.3°F.  So, to have a liquid wetting agent for effective dust control when the temperature is around 25°F, we add 1500 pounds of magnesium chloride into a 2000 gallon water truck or about a 0.9% Mag brine solution.  And, now we have our “solution” to keep the dust out of the air!

Here’s the formula and factors Emilcott uses to determine how much magnesium chloride we need to add to the water truck to get the right, wet solution:

∆T = i * K_f * m

Read More

Topics: health and safety, dust control, General EHS, Construction H&S, Hazardous Waste Management, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Air Sampling, environmental air monitoring, magnesium chloride, mag brine, mag flake, magnesium chloride hexahydrate

Dale Wilson, CIH, LEED AP

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ended 2010 with two announcements that impact Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ).   The first of these announcements involves polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in school environments. In their press release and guidance document , the EPA is recommending the removal of all PCB-containing fluorescent light ballasts from school buildings.  The focus is on school buildings built prior to 1979 which have not undergone a complete lighting retrofit since that time.  (Note:  In 1979, the EPA banned the use and processing of PCB.)  The EPA makes these recommendations following the detection of elevated PCB concentration in indoor air at several schools where damaged PCB -containing light fixtures were present.  According to the EPA , “PCBs have been demonstrated to cause cancer, as well as a variety of other adverse health effects on the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, and endocrine system.”

While this announcement is directed at schools, commercial and/or residential buildings with pre-1979 fluorescent light fixtures should also consider following this guidance to prevent exposure to their building occupants.  While replacing such fixtures will improve indoor environmental quality, there is another likely benefit:  energy costs are reduced when replacing these older light fixtures with modern, energy-efficient models.   The costs of installing lighting equipment upgrades may also be offset if there is an active incentive program offered by your state government and/or local utility such as these Clean Energy programs offered by the state of New Jersey.  This type of office or plant upgrade is a quadruple “win” opportunity for companies who qualify: 

• Improve employee work conditions by enhancing their IEQ


• Reduce your operating costs


• Participate in an environmental or “green” program


• And, best of all, have some or all of the equipment paid for by an outside resource!

EPA’s second end-of-2010 announcement recommends testing for radon, as January is National Radon Action Month.   Radon is a naturally-occurring, colorless, odorless gas that can impact your building’s IEQ if mitigation measures are not in place.  Radon exposure is the leading cause of non-smoking lung cancer.  Winter months such as January are the perfect times to test for radon as doors and windows generally remain closed for extended periods of time and heating equipment is in operation potentially creating a pressure differential between the soil and the building’s interior that would promote the migration of radon into the building’s indoor air. 

To find out if your building is located in an area prone to elevated indoor radon concentrations you can view the EPA Radon Map.  Buildings located in Zone 1 counties (red colored) have the greatest potential for elevated radon, followed by Zone 2 (orange) and, finally, Zone 3 in yellow. 

Two easy ways to start 2011 off on the right foot -- follow the EPA’s recommendation by eliminating two significant and relatively easy IEQ concerns, PCBs and radon, from your building.

Have you participated in a state or federal lighting retrofit program? Did the electrical contractor find anything suspicious? How easy was the process? And, have you tested your home or office building for radon? What were the results?

Read More

Topics: indoor air quality, health and safety, General EHS, EPA, Air Sampling, Exposure, chemicals, schools, environmental air monitoring, indoor environmental quality, radon exposure, radon, fluorescent lighting, PCB

Laurie de Laski

Having spent a large part of the last 25 years as an EHS professional developing and implementing Health and Safety Plans in a wide variety of industries, I was pleased to see that companies are requesting contractors and service providers to be prequalified for safety during the bidding process.  Conceptually, prequalification for safety should “raise the safety bar” and, companies with a well-developed safety plan should be rewarded for their proactive ethos with a competitive edge in the marketplace.  At Emilcott we have seen this really happen! Highly competitive project opportunities open up for clients that have genuinely adopted a top to bottom buy-in on the importance and value of safety. And, of course, they also experience measurable drops in both injury and insurance rates based on their safety performance.

Is the safety prequalification process good?

To have the “win-win”, the safety programs required for the project must be appropriate for the bidding contractor’s scope of work.  And, these safety programs need to be adopted, implemented and enforced. So, in order to make the prequalification process manageable for the companies writing the scope of work and the bidding contractors, an industry of on-line safety verification companies has evolved. While helping the contracting companies organize their bid processes, this on-line verification is very one-size fits all and focuses heavily on written programs, which may not be applicable to the scope of work.  This all or nothing approach leaves me wondering if on-line verification actually does raise the bar or just rubber-stamps paper safety programs.

Here’s the process “in theory”…

Contractors must have written safety programs that meet the requirements of the client.  The programs are submitted on-line and reviewed by the verification company.  Programs meeting the specifications are passed; those that don’t pass are requested to be updated.  This practice sounds likes a good idea, however,

• Many times contractors are required to write safety plans for equipment and operations outside the scope of their operations.


• The contractors spend a significant amount of time inputting the information to the website with no guarantee of being accepted. 


• Many of the bidding contractors are small businesses without the support or money to handle the overhead costs associated with maintaining their entries in the safety verification website.

For a quick safety program, click here!

Don't have the time to develop a safety plan? Don’t know what you’re missing? Under the gun to qualify for a lucrative project?  Don’t worry!

A large number of on-line “safety” specialists are available to help contractors meet the prequalification safety requirements! They advertise the development of company-specific safety programs that will meet the verification requirements at a very low cost, and some will include on-line input on behalf of the contractor and guarantee that they will pass.  One organization guaranteed approval in 72 hours!

Wait a minute…what problem does this solve? These companies offer to “customize” the safety plan by including the contractor’s company name and logo.  These cookie-cutter programs may meet verification requirements, but don’t appear to be customized for the contractor operations or the protection of the workers.  My sense is that there is no effort to actually develop a program that would be implemented by the contractor.  In conclusion, this “click here” approach does not raise the safety bar – it merely creates the illusion of a safety culture.

So, does safety prequalification work?

While health and safety program verification using this broad, sweeping approach may reduce the client’s liability, it doesn’t automatically improve safety performance.  In addition, the contractor may not be aware that they are creating a huge liability if they don’t implement their own safety program. In fact, OSHA will fine heavily for injuries that occur due to the lack of compliance with their stated safety plan.  Criminal penalties are also a possibility since the contractor could be considered negligent in not implementing or enforcing the procedures.

Where should we go from here?

The Requirements - Companies should require contractors to maintain only the safety programs that apply to the scope of work.  Requiring extensive safety programs for hazards the contractor is not likely to encounter devalues the safety culture for both the site and the contractor.

The Contractor Safety Programs - Contractors need to honestly implement programs that apply to their scope of work; understand the intent of the specific safety programs by learning the requirements of the regulations, provide employee training, and foster a culture of safety awareness with their employees.

The Verification Process – Be clear about the REAL goal of the process. If the objectives are truly to reduce accidents, improve safety, and make sure that everyone goes home at night, then old fashioned site health and safety inspections are what should be required.  Seeing how people work is the best way to make improvements in safety!

Do you think that the on-line safety verification process actually make a difference or is worth the time and expense?  Have you worked on a project where the on-line verification process develop and promoted a safe work environment, or like me, do you doubt they make a positive impact at all?

Read More

Topics: Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Occupational Training, safety plan, health and safety plan, safety prequalification, on-line verification

Bruce Groves

Why do we care about particles floating around in our air? Small, inhalable particles are themselves pollutants that have shown to cause illness and chronic diseases such as asthma and certain types of lung cancer . Particles are also excellent indicators (or surrogates) for measuring other pollutants such as vapors and gases. By measuring the aerodynamic size of particles in our air, it is possible to identify and sometimes “fingerprint” them so that we can reduce or stop local sources of pollution immediately. The goal AND end result are to develop as clean a living and working area as possible.

What are we doing today?

Today, air monitoring is a piecemeal approach that is government-mandated but generally project related. When the project is over, the problem is essentially considered to be gone. Of course, in areas of high population density or industrial activity, continuous, real-time air monitoring of general conditions does not exist. Other than pollen counts, very little information about these pockets of high pollution and high particulates is available to the public or government agencies. And, the data that is available is generally much later and does not present an accurate picture of today’s problem.

What is the future in environmental air monitoring?

As technology has improved, so have particle detectors and the ease of data transmission and analysis. By 2013, small particle size detectors, such as those found in the Greenlight Environmental Monitoring System, will be consistently deployed in high population areas in such cities such as NYC, Tokyo, London and Los Angeles. These particle size detectors will be coupled with wind-speed and direction detectors and web cameras to pinpoint the exact sources of particle emissions (e.g., construction or industrial equipment, idling vehicles or high traffic transportation corridors) that are creating a measurable increase in local air pollution.

This web of detector stations will form an active or “live” map of a city that continuously measures and reports the concentration of various particle sizes. The “map” will be automatically programmed to provide warning levels and alarms to reveal when and where total particle concentrations exceed warning and safe threshold levels. By locating (in real time) the place, the direction of the pollution source and supporting video evidence, private companies and government agencies can take measures to stop or reduce the indicated pollution sources. Constant real-time monitoring, assessment and action will provide continuous improvement in local air quality that will reduce the onset of disease associated with inhaling dirty air. Warning systems set up through websites will enable agencies and individuals to check on their local air pollution conditions using their computer or smart phone.

What is the first step?

At Emilcott, we have been working with particulate monitoring on job sites for over 25 years. As an extension of our field experience, we’re working on a solution that meets the needs of our clients (private companies and government agencies) -- the Greenlight Environmental Monitoring System. With multiple project implementations under its belt, the Greenlight System’s particle size measurement, assessment and reporting capabilities are demonstrating how real-time monitoring is helping projects get cleaner each day – reducing the liabilities of our clients while giving them the information to keep the public and workers safe.

As the Greenlight System’s next phase of engineering development is outlined, our goal is to have a universal system that will provide comprehensive sampling in potentially high pollution areas so that neighborhood air quality can be improved and the incidence of lung disease is reduced. It will be a future watchdog for providing cleaner air locally where no such means of protecting local air quality exists today.

What do you think the future of environmental air monitoring holds? What are the benefits or challenges that you associate with monitoring and mapping pollutants in a broad geographic area?

Read More

Topics: Emilcott, indoor air quality, health and safety, Construction H&S, EPA, Emergency Response, Homeland Security, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, worker safety, Occupational Health, Air Sampling, Greenlight System, Exposure, environmental air monitoring, Respiratory, Public Safety, perimeter air monitoring

by: Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

When some of us head to the “office” the decisions we make about what to wear go way beyond fashion…our very lives could depend on our wardrobe choices. For many workers, Personal Protective Equipment, or PPE, protects them from slight and serious workplace injuries or illnesses resulting from contact with chemical, radiological, physical, electrical, mechanical, or other hazards. Here’s a rough guide to occupational “Dress for Success” (and survival!).

Let’s start with the head.

A properly fitting, ANSI-rated hard hat will do more than protect you from falling stuff. They’re rated to provide protection against electric and chemical hazards as well. By the way, you have to wear your hard hat correctly if you want it to protect your noggin:  Do not wear it backwards. Do not wear another hat underneath (except a proper hardhat liner).  Any stickers have to be removable so that the hard hat can be inspected for integrity.

Next, Move Down to the Eyes

According to OSHA, Not all eye protection is the same. Start by looking at the ANSI-89 rating on the specs. Does the rating match your job function?  And, don’t let style issues affect your decision whether or not to wear them. Safety glasses used to be big, unattractive, and were often uncomfortable. Not anymore! There are styles and sizes for everybody and most “well-dressed” workers have at least two pair:  sunglasses and clear. Keep in mind that eye injuries, including permanent blindness, occur on the job every day. According to OSHA, “ eye injuries alone cost more than $300 million per year in lost production time, medical expenses, and worker compensation”. Don’t let it happen to you.

Face Protection

OSHA considers face protection separate from eye protection - one is never a substitute for the other. This OSHA powerpoint is a great overview of eye and face protection requirements. Find out if your job (grinding and pressure washing for example) requires a face shield.

Don’t Forget Your Ears!

Your hearing is a delicate tool that, once damaged, cannot be repaired. Did you know that most cases of hearing loss in the US are the result of occupational exposure? Hearing protection, like respiratory protection, can get a little complicated so if you’re confused, ask an expert. EHS experts like Emilcott can perform quantitative noise analysis and provide best recommendations to protect hearing for your worksite. To start, a good rule of thumb is that if you need to raise your voice in normal conversation, you probably should be wearing hearing protection.

Body Protection

Protection for the body varies greatly depending on the hazard(s) encountered. At a minimum,   make sure you can be seen! High visibility garments are required by OSHA and DOT when working around traffic and are a good idea all the time.

Last (But Not Least), Your Feet

Safety footwear is required by OSHA if your feet are subject to injury. They also must be ANSI- approved -- look for the markings on the shoe or boot to be sure. 

The Final Word

Keep these points in mind the next time you get dressed for work:

• While individual PPE items may not go “out of style”, they do go out of date. Check your gear to make sure it’s still within the expiration date.

• Once your PPE has protected you from an injury, replace it.  It did its job and you don’t know how it will hold up a second time.

•  And, finally, get the good stuff. Those cheap boots may seem like a bargain until your feet start hurting.

By the way, the Dress for Survival list above, with the exception of respirators (a blog in itself!), is considered “minimum PPE” on most sites. You need proper protection for each body part just to get in.  Don’t know what to use?  For every job, there are specific OSHA requirements that are designed to keep you safe – your health and safety office or EHS group should be a resource for information as well as monitoring the worksite for safety needs. 

Does your company keep employees protected by dressing them in the appropriate safety PPE?  Have you ever done a self-evaluation, head to toe, of what you are wearing and if it adequately protects you from the job hazards that you may encounter?  Has your safety clothing ever protected you and how?

Read More

Topics: OSHA, indoor air quality, Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Hazardous Waste Management, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Fire Safety

Charles Peruffo

The Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990 (42 U.S.C. §13101 et seq. (1990)) was a paradigm shift in the control of pollution (and hazardous waste). While previous regulations emphasized the “end of the pipeline”, the PPA moved the control of pollution upstream in the manufacturing process to prevent the waste from being generated in the first place. Closely related to the PPA is the NJ Pollution Prevention Act.  Passed in 1991, the NJ PPA implements the concept of reduction in waste production “upstream” by requiring affected companies to develop and submit a 5-year pollution reduction strategy and file  a Release and Pollution Prevention Report (RPPR). The NJ Release and Pollution Prevention Report collects data for New Jersey Right to Know Act ( NJRTK).

What does the Federal PPA require?

Facilities must account for their use of toxic chemicals  and, where feasible, reduce their use.  Toxic pollution that cannot be reduced should be recycled, and pollution that cannot be recycled should be disposed of in an environmentally safe manner. 

EHS professionals must have a firm understanding of the processes that use toxic chemicals in order to reduce their use.  Documenting these activities is an important step in PPA compliance and must include an accounting for the final disposal of toxic chemicals.  Generally this is done using the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Reporting Form R.  

For facilities in New Jersey, what else is required?

The New Jersey Pollution Prevention Act (NJ PPA), enacted in August of 1991, requires a Pollution Prevention (“P2”) Plan for facilities that meet specific requirements:

• A facility in New Jersey that files a Form R and a Release and Pollution Prevention Report (RPPR) under the New Jersey Worker and Community Right to Know Act for the same chemical(s) in two consecutive years.  Note that in New Jersey any employer required to submit a TRI Form R is also required to submit the RPPR.


• The chemicals listed in the Form R and RPPR remain at or above the TRI activity thresholds.

The facility must  prepare a five-year Pollution Prevention (P2) Plan and submit a P2 Plan Summary by July 1 once they become covered (the second year they submit an RPPR for the same chemical).  This becomes the “base year”.  For each of the following years that the facility remains at or above the TRI activity thresholds, the facility completes the P2-115 which compares pollution prevention progress for the reporting year to the base year.

The PPA Filing Process by an EHS Professional

When recently preparing PPA paperwork for a small biotech site, I had to collect a variety of information for preparing a New Jersey P2 Plan.  A brief review of the steps is listed below.  For detailed instructions, look at NJDEP Form DEP-113.

1. Contacted the company’s purchasing department to find out how much of each toxic chemical had been delivered to the facility. 


2. Contacted the company’s hazardous waste management contractor to confirm that the amount purchased (Step 1) equaled the amount that was disposed. 


3. Compare the purchased to disposed amounts. The amounts did not match. 


4. Investigate the discrepancy.  It turned out the waste management contractor was using a less accurate method for calculating the percentage of toxic chemical in our waste stream.  Their laboratory data indicated that the company was disposing of more toxic chemical than purchased.  Ultimately, the volume data from the company’s purchasing department was used since no new toxic chemicals could be produced by the company’s processes. 


5. Reviewed the company’s air permit for an estimation of the toxic chemicals lost to the air.


6. Calculated the chemical remaining as residue in the empty drums, which were also removed by our hazardous waste management contractor.


7. Contacted the site Controller for the facility SIC code.


8. Prepared a “Five-Year Use Reduction Goal” based on pollution prevention activities such as process improvements after a review of documentation of meetings where possible improvements were discussed with personnel who work with toxic chemicals as well as process engineering diagrams. (Sets site five year pollution prevention goals).
   
   
   
   • Progress towards these goals needs to be reviewed yearly and documented on the site P2 Plan.
   
   
   
   


9. Obtain signatures for plan from the “highest ranking corporate official with direct operating responsibility” and the “highest ranking corporate official at the facility”.

Note --- A P2 Plan Summary needs to be updated and submitted every five years for the chemicals referenced in the original P2 Plan submission.

This process needs to be repeated for each toxic chemical at each applicable facility in New Jersey with all of the information included as part of one P2 Plan regardless of the number of toxic chemicals reported.  The facility does need to file one RPPR for each chemical. Does this seem like a lot of work? Consider this:  In the twenty years since adoption, the PPA and NJ PPA have helped to substantially reduce the use and improper disposal of toxic chemicals by requiring industry to examine their work processes.

How about your facility?

As a facility, are you tracking your toxic chemicals and filing the appropriate PPA/NJ PPA documentation? Have you noticed that a mindful approach to the processes and paperwork have resulted in reduced usage and better, more healthful disposal of chemicals?

About Our Guest Blogger:  Charles Peruffo is an EHS professional specializing in laboratory health and safety. Prior to his EHS career, Charles spent many years as chemist in the pharmaceutical industry with responsibilities ranging from laboratory safety to analyst training.  He holds a Bachelor of Science in Biology from Montclair State University and is pursuing his Master of Science in Occupational Safety Health Engineering from New Jersey Institute of Technology.

Read More

Topics: health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, EPA, Emergency Response, Hazardous Waste Management, HazCom, Compliance, Air Sampling, reporting, chemical manufacturer, regulation, chemicals, Hazard Communication Standard, pollution prevention, pollution, chemical disposal, Right to Know

Carrie Bettinger - CSP, CHMM

It’s a windy, rainy day in northern New Jersey today and, as I drive through my town, I see the sanitation trucks are out to collect garbage and paper recyclables as early as they can before everything is soaked.  My town roads are basically paved horse trails so imagine narrow, winding roads with lots of sharp curves with a posted speed limit of 25 MPH.  So why is one of the garbage trucks going about 35MPH on one of these roads with a soaking wet worker standing on the truck’s rear platform clinging with a death grip to the side?  Is it that important to get the garbage in as fast as possible?  Why is the worker not in the truck if they are not making stops?  Does one of these workers have to die before this sanitation company takes steps to stop these stupid and unsafe acts?

As an experienced Safety Professional, I’m trained to recognize compliance-driven and non-compliance "best practice" occupational safety violations.  However, what does it take to change laws and habits that affect workers and citizens?  In our society and legal system it seems that, yes, someone (or many) has to tragically die before change and regulation are considered.

Let’s review some of our history:

1911:  The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire in New York resulted in 146 worker deaths due to locked escape routes leading to local then nationwide Life Safety Laws.

Read More

Topics: OSHA, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Chemical Safety Board, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Safety, Occupational Training, Lab Safety, Safety Training in Spanish, water safety

Bruce Groves - CIH

In July, David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, published a memo to his staff at OSHA highlighting several new approaches that OSHA is using (or planning to use) in its effort to protect workers.  Dr. Michaels is building on the progress of his predecessors and reinforcing some of the weak links in the system created both by Congress and former administrations. In his recent letter, Dr. Michaels reviews some legacy issues that limit OSHA-influence in creating safer workplaces such as

• OSHA has only 2,000 inspectors responsible for the health and safety of 130 million workers at 7 million worksites


• OSHA fines are too small to have an adequate deterrent effect


• OSHA standards provide limited protection to whistleblowers from retaliation


• OSHA occupational exposure standards have been established for only a small percentage of chemicals used in US workplaces (most of those are based on out-of-date science) with a slow and resource-intensive standard-setting process

Dr. Michaels states that OSHA needs to transform how it addresses workplace hazards, and in its relationship to employers and workers. As such he outlines a new strategy that is a clear shift from recent years indicating that there is a “new sheriff in town” and business (ALL businesses) should take heed.  Here are some of my extrapolations and thoughts regarding 6 of these transformational items -- consider how they will affect your business or workplace.

1.       Stronger Enforcement:  Some Employers Need Incentives to Do the Right Thing

OSHA will have more and bigger sticks.  OSHA is redirecting resources to conduct inspections of high risk industries and tasks including ergonomics.

Read More

Topics: Emilcott, OSHA, indoor air quality, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Lab Safety & Electrical, emergency response training, Occupational Training, Safety Training in Spanish, water safety, small business

Dale Wilson, CIH, LEED AP

When the National Weather service issues a forecast calling for 3 to 4 inches of rain, most people react by wondering how it will affect their plans or travel.  I think about what water damage will occur.

 When heavy rains are forecast, are you ready? Do you know what to do if your building is affected by rain penetration through the roof or walls? What is your plan if your building is flooded by a local stream or river?  Even without bad weather, water damage is always a possible threat if your building has a water line break.  Or worse yet, do you know how to react if there’s a sewage back-up?

Depending on the water source your options for cleaning up and salvaging property vary greatly.  But for all kinds of damage, you need to have a plan in place anticipating what you will do, who you will call, and how quickly they will respond.  Emilcott was recently asked to work in four, very different, water-damaged commercial and/or multi-tenant residential properties.   These events included:

• Retail and Office Complex – Roof and Façade Leak


• Office and Warehouse – Broken Water Supply Main


• Multi-tenant Apartment building – Sprinkler Activation


• Public Housing Complex – Steam Leak

What did all four projects have in common?  The answer is time.  Lots of time!  Too much time between the initial event, the response and Emilcott’s resulting late involvement!  Time and water combined can grow to be an expensive and time-consuming enemy.  Failure to respond promptly will, very likely, result in mold growth within the building requiring significantly more demolition than if the condition is handled in a timely manner.  What is the definition of timely? As soon as it is discovered!

With the retail complex, we were called in approximately one month after the roof and walls began leaking.  An employee actually complained to their nearest OSHA office and OSHA issued a notice of potential violation to the employer.  Mold was present in a localized area of the store, along with a significant insect infestation due to wet, damp conditions of building surfaces.   Unfortunate results of the delay:  a mold remediation project was required and portions of the retail space were out of use for weeks.

The damage to the office and warehouse operation was more significant.  Water from the broken water main filled the 5400 sq. ft.  office to several inches and made its way to the adjacent warehouse.  The initial response by the building owner seems logical:  removal of standing water, placement of a few box fans to attempt to dry the carpet, and operating the air conditioning 24/7 as cold as the occupants would tolerate.  By the time we arrived just 5 days after the event, sheetrock walls were saturated at the base of every wall and elevated moisture readings were present up to 8 feet above the floor. Relative humidity was close to 70%, carpets had a strong musty odor, and internal wall cavities were impacted by mold growth even though no visible growth was observed on the exterior of the wall.  Final results of a mere 5 day delay in appropriate responsiveness:  the tenant and their sub-tenants loss use of the office area as trailers were brought in to house them while remediation and reconstruction occurred over a two week time period.

A kitchen fire occurred in the residential apartment complex triggered sprinklers to turn on which caused water to run from the sixth floor down to ground level.  Removal of standing water was the only initial response.  When Emilcott arrived 2 weeks later sheetrock walls were still saturated with water, visible mold was appearing in multiple, occupied apartments, and paint was bubbling and peeling from the walls.  Another significant mold remediation project was required, which in turn required relocation of tenants while remediation was in progress.

Finally, the public housing complex had experienced a steam leak for a period of several months.  Tenants in effected units were relocated and those apartments remained unoccupied.  However, an unusual occurrence happened with this steam leak as these apartments had plaster walls.  Mold grew quite well on the painted surface of the walls, something that may be expected, but due to high, high humidity and moisture levels in the plaster for extended periods of time, the analytical laboratory verified that the mold growth penetrated into the plaster from the surface.  This resulted in the demolition of the plaster walls and loss of effected housing units for several additional months.

For each of these properties and water-related circumstances, delayed and improper response increased the magnitude of the problem resulting in increased time that each space was unusable, and increased the total cost of response and repair. What should you do instead?  Bringing in a water-remediation expert immediately to identify the scope of the problem, develop a water response action plan, and implement that plan right away will minimize the damage to building materials and reduce impacts to building occupants.  In each of the four instances listed above, response actions like relocating furnishing away from walls or out of the area completely, immediately removing cove moldings, installing commercial grade dehumidification equipment, installing commercial grade floor fans, selective limited demolition, and actively monitoring and evaluating the drying process would have significantly reduced the duration of the response activity and the overall cost of each event. 

So, how can you reduce the costs of the surprise water problem? My advice is to plan now -- whether it is for rain and flooding that may occur due to weather conditions or for the pipe break that always happens unexpectedly.  Knowing who to call to determine the scope of the problem and who can implement the recommended response will save you significant time, money, property and hassle.

Read More

Topics: OSHA, indoor air quality, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, EPA, Air Sampling, Mold, environmental air monitoring, Respiratory, Water Response Plan