Environmental Health and Safety Blog | EHSWire

Sarah Stibbe Damaskos



Did you know that, in fiscal year 2010, OSHA issued approximately 94,000 citations?  Using this data, OSHA has recently released its Annual Top 10 list of Most Cited Violations.  OSHA releases this list every year – why? Paula Kaufmann, a CIH at Emilcott, thinks OSHA is telling us where we need to focus!  Use it as a warning or indicator that that OSHA is monitoring these trends and will be targeting companies most likely to have employees working with these hazards. 

At Emilcott, we provide health and safety guidance and support for hundreds of clients that range in size from small, family-owned businesses to Fortune 100 companies with facilities throughout the world. Our EHS consulting work familiarizes us with all types of facilities and a wide range of health and safety issues. One common thread brings these different companies and industries together:  when they embrace a company-wide safety culture they reduce their risks. So, when we look at the categories and the sheer volume of violations (47,000!) that support OSHA’s Top 10, we know that the solution for every violation is universal:   safety training and commitment to creating a safe work environment with management leadership and employee involvement! With a top to bottom buy-in on the importance and value of safety, occupational hazards are observed, analyzed and prevented.  We have seen injury (and insurance) rates drop for our clients that have genuinely adopted this approach.  Some clients have even won highly competitive projects with their safety performance making the winning difference!

Let’s get back to this year's Top 10 categories. From year to years this lists stays virtually the same, but what we strive for, as occupational health and safety professionals, is a reduction in the number of incidents (and violations). 

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees.  As we review just the top 5 violations of 2010, consider if your company is providing adequate training and support to create a safe and healthful workplace for you.  Do you work in a culture of safety? What can you do to make your workplace safer for yourself and your coworkers?  Does your company understand the complete cost of ignoring occupational safety practices? 

1)  Scaffolding (OSHA 29 CFR 1926.454)

Training Solution:   At a minimum – Scaffolding awareness, approximately 2-3 hours of training investment. 

Learn More:  “ When OSHA revised its scaffolds standard in 1996, BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] studies showed that 25% of workers injured in scaffold accidents had received no scaffold safety training, and 77% of scaffolds were not equipped with guardrails. OSHA estimates that informed employers and workers, in compliance with correct safety standards, can save as many as 50 lives and prevent 4,500 accidents every year. In a recent BLS study, 72 percent of workers injured in scaffold accidents attributed the accident either to the planking or support giving way, or to the employee slipping or being struck by a falling object.”

2)  Fall Protection (OSHA 29 CFR 1926.503 & 1926.1060)

Training Solution:  OSHA requires training for anyone working on elevated surfaces, an approximate 2-4 hour training investment per person  This includes above excavations!  There is a requirement for Competent Person as well (to ensure that everyone is following the requirements and the equipment is appropriate).

Safety Violations Cost:  “ The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited, a residential roofing contractor in Belleville, for violations in connection with fall hazards. Proposed penalties total $106,400.”

 3)  Hazard Communication (OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1200 & 1926.59)

Training Solution:  OSHA requires employers to provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area.  This means an initial training (1 to 2 hours) and follow-up training when new chemical hazards are brought onsite or when employees have new job tasks involving new chemical hazards.  Maintaining an accurate, up-to-date list of substances and a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for each substance  are also required.

Learn More:  Find out more about Hazard Communication here and, as global harmonization moves forward, talk to your health and safety staff about new developments or subscribe to updates from this OSHA site. 

Safety Violations Story: Young Workers:  Robert

4)  Respiratory Protection (OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 & 1926.103)

Training Solution:  All employees who are required to wear respiratory protection, including filtering face pieces, must be properly trained how to use and care for a respirator-- this takes about 1 hour. Medical Clearance and Respirator Fit-test is also required, as is the assignment of a Respiratory Protection Program Administrator who should be properly trained in this task (about 8 hours).

Learn More:  Why Proper Respirator Protection Lets You Breathe Longer (and Breathe Easy)

5)  Ladders (OSHA 29 CFR 1910.26)

Training Solution:  Employees should be trained to properly use ladders and to recognize the hazards from falls while using ladders and stairways. This is generally a 30-minute training investment and can be part of regularly scheduled Tool Box Talks. OSHA also requires Ladder Inspection Program to remove and destroy defective ladders.

Learn More: “ OSHA rules apply to all stairways and ladders used in construction, alteration, repair, painting, decorating and demolition of worksites covered by OSHA’s construction safety and health standards” and this quick guide to portable ladder-related falls”.

So, are you concerned that you could be caught, written up and fined by OSHA due to safety violations?  Then, you need the Emilcott Training Needs Assessment Tool!  It’s free and is designed to help you determine which employees need health and safety training to meet regulatory compliance specific to your operation.

Here’s a final interesting  statistic:  According to OSHA, an effective safety and health program forms the basis of good worker protection and can save time and money—about $4 for every dollar spent—and increase productivity and reduce worker injuries, illnesses and related workers’ compensation costs.  Now that’s an investment that makes sense to your workforce and your wallet (and keeps you off OSHA’s top 10)!

Read More

Topics: Emilcott, OSHA, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Safety Training in Spanish

Megan Grennille

Your next visit to a truck stop may be more pleasant in a few years.  New standards were announced on October 25th from the DOT (Department of Transportation) and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in heavy-duty trucks and buses.  The standards, which are set to be phased in on new vehicles in 2014, will include requirements to improve fuel efficiency which benefits businesses, the shipping industry, and cities and towns.

The large vehicles being targeted by the proposed standards are divided into three categories: combination tractors, heavy duty pickups and vans, and vocational vehicles.  Combination tractors will have a 20% decrease in CO ₂ output as well as fuel consumption.  Heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans will have separate gas and diesel standards; by 2018 CO ₂ emissions and fuel consumption will decrease by 10% in gas vehicles and 15% for diesel.  Vocational vehicles, such as buses and utility trucks, could see a 10% reduction in fuel consumption and CO ₂ emissions by 2018.  

The new regulations bring environmental and economic benefits.  People who live near bus depots, cities, and highways should be happy.  And, on those hot smoggy days near the end of this decade, the air will be a little cleaner.

What do you think of the regulations? Will they impact your business?

Read More

Topics: DOT, indoor air quality, General EHS, EPA, Hazardous Materials, worker safety, Occupational Health, Air Sampling, Exposure, chemicals, environmental air monitoring, Working Green, greenhouse gas emissions

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

Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

The health effects from airborne hazards are a frequent topic in many health and safety courses, especially in hazardous substance and hazardous waste training.  This is because so many of these exposures may not show up as health problems for decades! Consider asbestos. While it’s not harmful to the touch, inhalation can be fatal, but it can take 25-30 years before asbestosis or mesothelioma can develop. Both are chronic and often deadly diseases of the lungs.

The lungs are amazing. It surprises most people to learn that the lungs have the largest surface area of any body organ -- about 80 times more area than the skin, or about the size of a tennis court!  As we breathe, our lungs are in constant contact with the outside world and that is a lot of contact area. They need to be protected.

Over three million American workers are required to wear respirators to protect themselves from hazardous airborne contaminants.  Not surprisingly, OSHA has some pretty strict rules when it comes to protecting our lungs . Despite this , it is estimated that more than half of the respirators worn are not worn in accordance with OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.134

Did you know that…

• If workers are wearing respirators, a written program is required?


• A medical evaluation is required for anyone who wears a respirator?


• A fit test of each respirator worn must be conducted initially AND annually?


• The workplace must be evaluated to determine the hazard so that the proper respirator (there are many) can be selected?


• These rules, and others, apply to what many people refer to as “dust masks”?

Proper respirator usage training is also required. Why? Because wearing the wrong type, wrong size, or an improperly fitted respirator can be more dangerous than not wearing one at all. For example:

1. Wearing a filtering respirator in an O₂-deficient atmosphere, or the wrong cartridge, can mislead you to believe that you are protected…when you are not!


2. A mask with even the slightest poor fit allows contaminates in and may actually increase exposure levels.


3. Not everyone can wear a respirator. Because a respirator restricts your breathing, people with certain medical conditions can be seriously harmed by wearing them. This is why being medically cleared prior to use is so important, and required.

Not complying with the rules designed for occupational safety can be costly… and not just in fines and penalties. Too many workers have destroyed their health by failing to protect their delicate, vital lungs. And, it’s not just at work. Working around the home and yard can also present respiratory dangers, too. If you are not sure that you need more than a “dust mask” ask someone who can help.

Have you been properly trained to use your respirator and fit-tested to make sure it is actually stopping hazards from reaching your lungs?Are you confident that you are using your respirator properly and that the respirator that you have selected is the best for the contaminants you are exposed to?  How about the person next to you - are they in compliance?  Hopefully you and your workmates can answerYES! to these questions. If you have any questions about respiratory protection, please ask me!

Read More

Topics: OSHA, indoor air quality, Personal Protective Equipment, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, Homeland Security, H&S Training, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Lab Safety & Electrical, emergency response training, Fire Safety, environmental air monitoring, Respiratory, Occupational Training

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

Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

Every organization develops a “safety culture”, be it good or bad. It is immediately observable to anyone who cares to look, and more people are – particularly prospective clients and business partners.  When evaluating vendors and business partners, companies with strong safety cultures will steer clear of doing business with companies with poor safety records; the risks and exposures are too great.  In addition to the obvious reasons of possible injury or death to workers or the public, there is the potential for serious damage to a company’s image and reputation should their vendor or subcontractor have an incident or accident.  We’ve all heard some of the stories recently in the news; reporters will highlight a major construction accident and all the players are named, regardless of their culpability.

Government agencies also use strong criteria to evaluate potential vendors. The State of New York has severely tightened up its safety and health requirements following the series of construction accidents that have plagued NYC in recent years.

A company can develop a comprehensive health and safety programs. It can post attention-getting signs and posters warning workers of hazards. It can also provide all manner of safety and personal protective equipment and conduct training for employees. These measures are good, but as soon as a supervisor or company owner walks onto a site ignoring the PPE requirements, all this good goes out the window. “Do as I say, not as I do” is not the way lead. The rules must to apply to all, without exception. Even more importantly, owners and managers should set a proper example. Professional experience has shown me that when management creates and “lives” a proactive safety culture, it will get the best results. It’s the front-line managers and supervisors that make the difference.

And it’s a never ending task. Maybe your company has a few workers who constantly violate the safety rules without any real consequences or discipline. The message being sent is pretty clear: the company doesn’t take safety seriously. Most people realize that the rules are there for a reason; their protection and it’s the law.  However, there will always be a small percentage of people that just don’t get it. Without enforcement of the policies, there is not only the risk of worker injury, but an erosion of the “safety culture” of the organization and a negative impact on morale. Plus, it is the employer and management who will be responsible for any fines or penalties handed out as well as increased insurance premiums, particularly workman’s compensation. Often, they are found personally responsible. Why would anyone risk this?

The point is that paying lip service to safety won’t fly anymore -- proactive is best. There are all kinds of resources to help your company succeed. OSHA even offers free services:    http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/smallbusiness/consult.html and http://www.osha.gov/dte/outreach/construction_generalindustry/index.html.  You may also get help from a trade or professional association that you belong to. Health and safety consulting services from companies like Emilcott who are experienced in honing in on risk and compliance can be a great investment to shift your company onto the right track.

Have you ever worked for a company that has an ineffective or sham health and safety policy? How did it make you or fellow employees feel? Was there a tipping point event that made them switch to being proactive and how did they implement a new, comprehensive program (that worked)?

Image Credit:  www.lumaxart.com

Read More

Topics: Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Lab Safety & Electrical, emergency response training, Fire Safety, Occupational Training, Safety Culture, Leadership

Paula Kaufmann, CIH

I just read an article in the New York Times ( Hazards: Watch Where You Point That Laser) about a 15-year boy who bought a laser pointer on the Internet.  He selected this particular model as the light was supposed to be powerful enough pop balloons and burn holes in fabric.  And, it was all he had hoped for and more.  He popped balloons from a distance and burnt holes in his sister’s sneakers.  However, he literally got burned by the “and more” features of his new toy. Tragically, he shined the pointer in a mirror and the light beam reflected back onto one of his eyes causing major damage. 

My first thought was, “How stupid was that”.  My second thought was more balanced, “I guess he wasn’t properly trained or didn’t read the instructions”.  I’ve been told by loved ones that I can be a bit intrusive (if not annoying) with my unconscious monitoring of unsafe behavior in my constant role of “health and safety inspector”.  So be it!  According to the Home Safety Council, every year there are millions of preventable home-related incidents and accidents “ that result in nearly 20,000 deaths and 21 million medical visits”.  

Here are some examples of what I consider stupid (or let’s say shortsighted) actions -- some at work, some at home. Yes, I make these observations all the time to family and friends and, as you can imagine, that can be a bit trying for them but I feel it’s worth the price.

• Using an electric lawn mower on a damp lawn with damaged extension cords repaired with electrical tape AND with the ground prong clipped. Worse yet – asking my child to use this dangerous setup!


• Removing the guard from a circular saw.


• Cutting overhead branches without wearing a hard hat or eye protection.


• Smoking a cigarette, cigar or pipe while filling a car with gas. Worse yet – a gas station attendants smoking cigarettes while pumping gas.


• Construction or utility workers using a jack hammer on a concrete sidewalk and not wearing safety glasses or hearing protection while wearing a hard hat.


• Police directing traffic without wearing a traffic safety vest. Worse yet – doing this after dark in a dark uniform without white gloves.


• Mowing the lawn in sandals and shorts without eye protection while listening to music at full volume (using earphones not noise reducing hearing protection).


• Eating snacks while removing paint from old furniture or woodwork in a house built before WW I, which makes the lead content highly probable.  Worse yet – having your kids help you while you dry sweep or use a regular household vacuum to “clean up” the area.


• Utility worker serving as a confined space watch (at the ground level of an underground manway) talking (and laughing) on a cell phone and drinking coffee (usually about 10 feet from the manway).


• Nail salon workers wearing dust masks while applying acrylics to customers’ nails -- dust masks don’t reduce exposure to the chemicals used during acrylic application. Worse yet - acrylic nail services happening in a tiny storefront with limited ventilation.


• Being “careful” when installing an electrical light by shutting off the switch to the power but not the circuit breaker to the line.


• Applying insect repellant from an aerosol can while sitting by a bonfire.


• Removing a bicycle helmet as soon as your mom can’t see you as it is just too hot to protect your brain.

And, finally, one of my favorite tales is the time that I was away from home on a business trip, and while I was gone, my husband renovated my home office space.  He did a beautiful job, but when I asked him why he went through the effort to surprise me, he said “It is so much easier to get work done when the OSHA inspector is not home”.  I just wish I could have given him a citation.

If you’re interested in home safety, September – National Preparedness Month -- is a good time to begin.  You can start with a visit the website of the Home Safety Council® (HSC), a national nonprofit organization dedicated to preventing home-related injuries. You’ll  find dozens of tips, stories and videos and information about Safety Saturday (September 25) at participating Lowe’s stores.

What are some of your favorite observations of “stupid” health and safety practices outside of the work environment? And, if you’re a health and safety professional, how do you balance maintaining a safe home life without driving your friends and family crazy?

Read More

Topics: health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Emergency Response, worker safety, Occupational Safety, emergency response training, Fire Safety, Public Safety, water safety, industrial hygiene, home safety

Dian Cucchisi, PhD, CHMM

Environmental Health and Safety Professionals are often faced with questions that do not seem to have black and white answers, but, in reality, regulatory requirements are not that gray.  A common question: When do the requirements for 29 CFR 1910.120 and 29 CFR 1926.65 (OSHA’s Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response regulations) apply?  The challenge for EHS professionals is to communicate to workers the distinction between what are considered environmental health risks and the risks to human health, and to clarify the difference of the word “hazardous” as used by various environmental protection agencies and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the state environmental protection agencies have standards for soil and groundwater “cleanliness” for residential and non-residential properties.  Soil or groundwater in exceedence of those standards needs to be remediated (usually by removal), but to add to the confusion, sometimes when soil and/or groundwater is removed from the site and transported to a disposal facility it may not fall into the EPA’s definition for hazardous waste.  So here lies the misunderstanding; if it is not classified as “hazardous waste” by the EPA, people often make the determination that it is not considered hazardous to workers and, therefore, it is not necessary to take measures to protect the workers’ health and safety.

When it comes to worker safety and the risks to human health, we must look at the requirements provided by OSHA.   OSHA is focused on exposure potential and the resulting hazard assessment evaluation to workers from the chemicals that may be encountered when working in areas with potentially contaminated soil and/or groundwater.  If the chemicals present are regulated by OSHA with a Permissible Exposure Limit (exposure based on an 8-hour average), the employer is required to conduct exposure assessments and air monitoring to determine potential risks to the workers onsite.  It also requires that workers are protected from these potential exposures through either engineering controls or personal protective equipments (such as tyvek, gloves and respirators).

 There is also a need to protect the workers and meet all the other applicable OSHA standards that mitigate health and safety risks to workers on this site.   Such required protection would include: 

• developing a site-specific health and safety plan,


• training workers in chemical hazards and controls,


• conducting environmental monitoring to determine exposure,


• instituting controls (PPE and Engineering) to protect from exposure potential,


• clean up (decontamination).and a number of other procedures.  

It is surprising and frustrating that this issue is still debated, but if it is, doesn’t it make sense to use the guidelines in these standards to clarify? We are talking about human health and the regulations are clear about the requirements for worker training and personal protection when dealing with chemical contamination.  You can use the environmental classifications to determine how to treat the situation, but you must look to OSHA to protect the workers as they are doing it.

Have you ever had workplace confusion regarding environmental risk and hazardous to human health? If so, I'd like to hear about your situation and how you resolved it.

Read More

Topics: OSHA, DOT, health and safety, General Industry H&S, Construction H&S, EPA, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety

Paula Kaufmann, CIH

National Public Radio ( NPR) recently reported their findings of an investigation of safety issues at the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia.  I was listening to the report while enjoying my morning walk in a nearby park.  It stopped me in my tracks!

As part of their investigative report, NPR discovered that there were situations at the mine when the methane gas monitors on continuous mining machines were disabled because the monitors repeatedly shut down the machines.  The miners interviewed explained that supervisors told them it was acceptable to disable these monitors as long as the miner operating the equipment used a hand-held methane monitor to test the air.  This is the part of the report that stopped me in my tracks!!!

The methane gas monitors are an essential part of the mining machine’s fail-safe system. They are factory-installed and essential components of the machine design; when the monitor senses an explosive atmosphere, the mining machine shuts down automatically.  The ONLY reason that spark-generating equipment can be operated in an environment likely to contain explosive concentrations of methane gas is precisely because the equipment is designed to automatically shut down if an explosive atmosphere is encountered. 

The procedures followed at the mine undermined (no pun intended) a fundamental safety feature of the continuous mining machine. 

The problem with using a hand-held monitor as a substitute for the interlock monitor is that the miner operating a continuous mining machine is 25 to 30 feet behind the face of a machine that is a continuous source of ignition (lots of sparks from metal cutting coal and rocks).  The monitor must be located directly at the source of the spark.  The miner isn’t at the source.

How could the mine leadership eliminate a critical risk management feature?  When deciding to override a critical safety system, the mine leadership should have considered the potential for loss of life AND damage to the mine AND damage to operating equipment.  You have to wonder if anyone really thought about “what if?” especially as Upper Big Branch was a notoriously “gassy” (methane producing) and, therefore, dangerous mine.  I wonder if any hazard or risk analyses were ever conducted for operating the mining machine without an operational methane monitor.   For clarity – here is a brief explanation about the hazards and risks of overriding a safety critical system and the outcome of their analyses:

What’s the difference between hazard and risk?

• A hazard is the source of potential damage, harm or adverse health effects on something or someone (i.e., explosive concentration level of methane gas, source of ignition).


• A risk is the chance or probability that damage, harm or adverse health effect will occur if something or someone is exposed to a hazard (i.e., a chance of the methane gas concentration would reach explosive levels in the presence of a source of ignition).

 A risk assessment is the process where one

• Identifies hazards,


• Evaluates the risk associated with that hazard, and


• Determines appropriate ways to eliminate or control the hazard.


• Safety controls minimize the risk by “controlling” the hazard (i.e., shutting down the mining machine eliminates the source of ignition)

Managers must understand the risk and the systems that put in place to control the hazard.  This is “managing the risk”. 

At the Upper Big Branch mine, the life-saving interlock system in a known high risk environment was disabled while workers were assured that an inappropriately-located substitute would be effective and work continued without interruption. It appears that appropriate risk management was not the goal since the presence of combustible concentrations of methane gas at sources of ignition might not be detected using the hand held monitors.   

The integrity of an organization depends on a leadership commitment to understanding and managing risk to protect their employees and assets as well as their reputation. This NPR report highlights what can happen when leadership is focused on one measure of success, in this case, production. Another recent example of compromised risk in exchange for uninterrupted production is the BP oil leak. Have you ever encountered myopic leadership in your workplace that trades risk management for another benefit. What happened? How do employees feel?

Read More

Topics: General Industry H&S, Emergency Response, Hazardous Materials, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Safety, Fire Safety, Exposure, Respiratory, Confined Space