FY 2015 OSHA and Houston Update

Jim SheltonHouston North Area Office

[email protected]

FY 2015 OSHA and Houston Update

• Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements – NAICS Update and Reporting Revisions• Two parts:

• Requires the reporting of any in-patient hospitalizations, amputations, and loss of an eye…• Updates the list of industries partially exempt

from the requirement to keep work related injury and illness records due to lower rates…

• Effective January 1, 2015

New Updated ‘1904’ Regulation

• Fatalities, hospitalizations, amputations, and loss of an eye will get triaged into three categories (1, 2, or 3)• Category 1 that will be inspected. Examples:• Fatalities, hospitalization of 2 or more, underage workers, history of

multiple injuries, Repeat offenders, SVEP/NEP/LEP, imminent danger• Category 2* will be evaluated. Examples:• Current hazard exposure, safety program failures, serious hazards,

temporary/vulnerable workers, OSHA history, health issues• Area Director evaluates and determines inspect or handle as a

Category 3 Rapid Response Investigation (RRI)

Updated ‘1904’ Regulation

• 41 Incidents Investigated HS• 15 Construction• 13 Hospitalizations• 2 Amputations

• 26 Manufacturing• 19 Hospitalizations• 7 Amputations

• 26 Incidents Investigated HN• 6 Construction• 6 Hospitalizations

• 20 Manufacturing• 9 Hospitalizations• 11 Amputations

About 284 incidents reported and 67 Incidents investigated Jan 1st through June 30th, 2015

Updated 1904 Reporting Requirements

If two or more employees are covered from same employer it was counted as one caseIf two or more employees are covered for different companies a case was counted for each company

• An updated NEP on Amputations was issued effective Aug 13, 2105• Updated NAICS and industries• There will be outreach to the

affected industries and inspections will then be conducted


• Temporary workers are entitled to the SAME protections under the OSH Act as all other covered workers• Staffing agency should evaluate the host employer’s worksite &

have staff trained to recognize safety and health hazards • Both employers must communicate, coordinate, and collaborate

in their efforts • Although the host, generally, has primary responsibility for

identifying hazards and complying with worksite specific health and safety requirements, the staffing agency also has a duty to ensure a safe workplace

Temporary Employees

• A temporary worker requested a safety harness and not provided with it fell 12 feet through the roof resulting in his hospitalization with fractured arms and severe contusions. • $362,500 penalty for seven violations (including one willful and

four willful egregious) for failing to provide fall protection and not promptly reporting the hospitalization. Cited also for not training employees in the use of fall protection and ladders• The staffing agency also received a serious citation

Temporary Employees

Temporary Employees

• Final Rule published May 4, 2015• Effective date August 3, 2015• Full enforcement postponed until

October 2, 2015• Full enforcement for residential

construction postponed until January 8, 2016• Requires a good faith effort….

Subpart AAConfined Spaces in Construction

• Detailed provisions requiring coordination of activities on a multi-employer worksite

Differences Between Cnst and GI

• A competent person must evaluate the worksite and identify confined spaces including permit spaces• Requiring continuous atmospheric monitoring whenever

possible• Requiring continuous monitoring of engulfment hazards• Allowing suspension of a permit instead of cancelation under

certain circumstances

Differences Between Cnst and GI

• Employers who direct workers to enter without using a complete permit system must prevent worker exposure to physical hazards through elimination of the hazard or isolation such as LOTO• Employers resulting on local emergency services for emergency

services must arrange for the responders to give the employer advanced notice if they will be unable to respond• Training must be in a language and vocabulary the worker

understands

Clarifications to the GI Standard

GHS

• The major changes to the HCS include:• Hazard Classification• Labels• Safety Data Sheets• Information and Training

• December 1, 2013 workers were to be trained on the new labels and Safety Data Sheets• CPL 02-02-079 Inspection Procedures for the

Hazard Communication Standard (HCS 2012)• Effective July 9, 2015

• Silica• Primary Metals Industries• Process Safety Management• Shipbreaking• Trenching and Excavation

• Combustible Dust• Federal Agencies• Hazardous Machinery• Hexavalent Chromium• Isocyanates• Lead

National Emphasis Programs (NEP):

• LOI - PSM Retail Exemption Interim Enforcement Policy• CPL 02-02-079 Inspection Procedures for the Hazard Communication

Standard (HCS 2012)• April 21, 2015 Memorandum Evaluating Hazardous Levels of

Accumulation Depth for Combustible Dusts • June 25, 2015 Memorandum Inspection Guidance for Inpatient

Healthcare Settings• LOI - Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals• and Covered Concentrations of Listed Appendix A Chemicals• LOI - RAGAGEP in Process Safety Management Enforcement

Important CPLs, LOIs, and Documents

• The Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP) is outlined in Compliance Directive 02-00-149• Applies to NAICS…• 211111 Oil and Gas Extraction• 213111 Drilling Oil and Gas Wells• 213112 Support Activities for Oil and Gas

Oil and Gas E & P

• Two or more Willful or Repeated violations or Failure-To-Abate notices or any combination of these violations/notices based on high gravity serious violations related to upstream oil and gas activities will now be considered a severe violator enforcement case

Oil and Gas E & P

• First R-VI EEP case June 2015 based on two Willful, seven Serious, and one Repeat citations with $221,200 in proposed penalties issued related to a multiple fatality inspection• The Willful citations: Use of a open flame

potable heater on the rig floor and failure to provide and use FRCs for protection from flash fires had been previously cited• Repeat was for egress from the derrick not

properly installed

Oil and Gas E & P

• Clarification of Employer's Continuing Obligation to Make and Maintain Accurate Records of Each Recordable Injury and Illness 1218-AC84• Comment period extended until Oct 28, 2015

• Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses 1218-AC49 at OMB• Walking Working Surfaces and Personal Fall

Protection Systems (Slips, Trips, and Fall Prevention) at OMB

Current Rules On the Radar

• OSHA penalties could increase in 2016• Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment

Act Improvements Act of 2015• Penalties could be adjusted for inflation from

1990• Maximum for a Willful citation from $70,000 to

possibly about $124,000• Maximum for a Serious citation from $7,000 to

possibly about $12,000• Possibly by August 2016

Items of Interest

• Whistleblower protections• 1099 ‘workers’• Darden Factors and WHD ‘Economic Realities’

• Citation format pilot program• New ‘Enforcement Weighting System’ – instead of

counting individual inspections an inspection will be assigned from 1-9 ‘Enforcement Units’• 1989 Safety and Health Program Management

Guidelines to be updated and published in 2016• Voluntary not a regulation

Items of Interest

• Safety and Health Program Management Guidelines open for comments• Update of the 1989

Guidelines• Voluntary not a mandatory

standard • Comments accepted until

February 15, 2016

Items of Interest

• Upstream Oil & Gas• High Noise in Manufacturing• Fabricated Metal• Falls in Non-Construction• Healthcare

• Construction• Heat Illnesses• Cranes in Construction• Grain Handling• Poultry Processing

Regional Emphasis Programs (REP)

• From Oct 1st, 2008 to September 31th, 2015 there have been approximately 358 fatalities/catastrophes in the area of the Houston North and Houston South Area Office jurisdictions• The numbers are estimates and are not

meant to be an exact count of incidents inspected or under OSHA’s jurisdiction. The information is for prevention purposes and not a statistical study

Houston Fatalities and Catastrophes

FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15*0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

27

18

2629

2327 28

40

2723 25 25

20 20

67

4549

54

48 47 48

Hou North Hou South Hou Total• Incidents appear steady with no big change in either the North or the South overall• Fatalities long term

appear to be trending upward on the North side and downward on the South side

Houston Activity Overall

* FY 2015 Data Search Nov 18, 2015

FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15*0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

31 29 30 2831 33

29

36

1619

26

1714

19

67

4549

54

48 47 48

Hou GI Hou Const Hou Total• General Industry (1910) was lower in FY15 after tapering up for several years• Construction (1926)

which seemed to be trending downward rose sharply in FY15

Houston Activity Overall


Keyword Overall

Event of Exposure Overall

FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15*0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

12

4

7

15

79

13

24

12 12 11 10

5 6

36

16

19

26

17

14

19

Hou North Cnst Hou South Cnst Hou Total Cnst• Construction sharply increased in both the North and South offices

Houston Construction Activity

* FY 2015 Data Search Oct 1, 2015

FY 13 FY 14 FY 150

2

4

6

8

10

12

Construction Focus 4

Struck By Caught Between FallsElectrical Other

• Construction Focus Four• Falls increased dramatically,

Electrical stayed the same, Caught Between continued to decline while Struck By increased

Houston Construction Activity

Event or Exposure Construction

Only includes events or exposures occurring in FY 14 and FY 15

1926 Standard # Requirement1926.501(b)(13) 102 Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more

above lower levels shall be protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system…

1926.1053(b)(1) 38 When portable ladders are used for access to an upper landing surface, the ladder side rails shall extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface to which the ladder is used to gain access; or… secured at its top to a rigid support…

1926.451(e)(1) 38 Scaffold platforms more than 2 feet (0.6 m) above or below a point of access, portable ladders… ramps, walkways… shall be used. Cross braces shall not be used as a means of access…

1926.501(b)(1) 30 Each employee on a walking/working surface (horizontal and vertical surface) with an unprotected side or edge which is 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above a lower level shall be protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems.

Top 10 MFC Construction Houston*

1926.501(b)(10) 18 Each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs, with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels shall be protected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and guardrail system, warning line system and safety net system, or warning line system and personal fall arrest system, or warning line system and safety monitoring system…

1926.652(a)(1) 17 Each employee in an excavation shall be protected from cave-ins by an adequate protective system designed in accordance with paragraph (b) or (c) of this section except…

1926.102(a)(1) 15 Employees shall be provided with eye and face protection equipment when machines or operations present potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents.

1926.451(b)(1) 24 Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds shall be fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as follows…


1926.451(g)(1) 22 Each employee on a scaffold more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level shall be protected from falling to that lower level…

1926.503(a)(1) 22 The employer shall provide a training program for each employee who might be exposed to fall hazards. The program shall enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and shall train each employee in the procedures to be followed in order to minimize these hazards…


*Top 10 MFC 1926 Standards does not include Standards such as 5(a)(1) or .1904 which could apply to either industry. Standards such as 1910.1200 which could also

apply to either industry are included under Part 1910

FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15*0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1514

19

1416

18

1516

15

11

1415 15

14

3129

3028

3132

29

Hou North GI Hou South GI Hou Total GI• General industry decreased in both the North and the South

Houston General Industry Activity


FY 13 FY 14 FY 150

2

4

6

8

10

12

General Industry Focus 4

Struck By Caught Between FallsElectrical Other

• General Industry Focus Four• Electrical, Caught Between,

Struck By, and Falls decreasing with Other increasing• A big factor in the increase in

Other incidents where the four heat related fatalities

Houston General Industry Activity

1910 Standard # Requirement1910.212(a)(1) 44 One or more methods of machine guarding shall be provided to protect the

operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks…

1910.1200(e)(1) 31 Employers shall develop, implement, and maintain at each workplace, a written hazard communication program which at least describes how the criteria specified in paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of this section for labels and other forms of warning, safety data sheets, and employee information and training will be met, and which also includes…

1910.212(a)(3)(ii) 26 The point of operation of machines whose operation exposes an employee to injury, shall be guarded. The guarding device shall be in conformity with any appropriate standards therefor, or, in the absence of applicable specific standards, shall be so designed and constructed as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle…/

Top 10 MFC General Industry Houston*

1910.215(b)(9) 19 Safety guards of the types described in Subparagraphs (3) and (4) of this paragraph, where the operator stands in front of the opening, shall be constructed so that the peripheral protecting member can be adjusted to the constantly decreasing diameter of the wheel. The maximum angular exposure above the horizontal plane of the wheel spindle as specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of this section shall never be exceeded, and the distance between the wheel periphery and the adjustable tongue or the end of the peripheral member at the top shall never exceed one-fourth inch….

1910.1200(g)(8) 18 The employer shall maintain in the workplace copies of the required safety data sheets for each hazardous chemical, and shall ensure that they are readily accessible during each work shift to employees when they are in their work area(s)...

1910.215(a)(4) 18 On offhand grinding machines, work rests shall be used to support the work. They shall be of rigid construction and designed to be adjustable to compensate for wheel wear. Work rests shall be kept adjusted closely to the wheel with a maximum opening of one-eighth inch to prevent the work from being jammed between the wheel and the rest, which may cause wheel breakage…


1910.305(b)(1)(ii) 18 Unused openings in cabinets, boxes, and fittings shall be effectively closed.

1910.1200(h)(1) 16 Employers shall provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new chemical hazard the employees have not previously been trained about is introduced into their work area…

1910.147(c)(1) 16 The employer shall establish a program consisting of energy control procedures, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performs any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative…

1910.147(c)(4)(i) 16 Procedures shall be developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees are engaged in the activities covered by this section.


*Top 10 MFC 1910 Standards does not include Standards such as 5(a)(1) or .1904 which could apply to either industry. Standards such as 1910.1200 which could also

apply to either industry are included under Part 1910

Event or Exposure General Industry

Only includes events or exposures occurring in FY 14 and FY 15

• Pipe insulator and staffing agency cited for exposing workers to amputation hazards in Houston. OSHA cites Rock Wool Manufacturing Co. and C & C Personnel LLC; fines total $85,950• Rock Wool was cited for seven serious and two repeat violations for exposing

workers to a variety of workplace hazards, chief among them struck by and amputation hazards for failing to protect workers from dangerous machinery. C & C Personnel was cited for four serious violations including failing to establish an energy control program to disable potentially hazardous machinery. OSHA initiated the March 2015 inspection after receiving a complaint. C & C Personnel LLC provided Rock Wood Manufacturing Co. with 53 temporary workers on a daily basis and Rock Wool supervised and assigned these workers their duties. Rock Wood Manufacturing Co. was fined $64,350, and C & C. Personnel LLC was fined $21,600

Press Releases

• OSHA cites M&M Manufacturing Co. LLC in Houston for three serious and one repeat violation, proposes $55K in fines• OSHA initiated the inspection after receiving a report of an

amputation at the facility under the new OSHA recordkeeping and reporting requirements that became effective January 1, 2015. OSHA's Houston North Area Office cited the employer for three serious violations for failing to disable potentially hazardous machinery and not guarding machine parts, which exposed workers to amputation hazards. The employer was also cited for one repeat violation for failing to guard equipment in which workers might get caught and injured

Press Releases

• Dollar Tree Store endangers workers again in Texas• OSHA's inspection of the Houston store was prompted by a

complaint that alleged blocked exits in the workplace. Two repeated violations, with a penalty of $103,000, were cited for failure to ensure that exit doors were kept clear and unobstructed and that boxes were stored securely. The four serious violations, with a penalty of $13,200, were for failing to clearly mark doorways along exit routes; failing to place valve protection caps on compressed helium cylinders; not training workers on fire extinguisher use; and not providing clear access to the breaker box

Press Releases

• U.S. Labor Department sues Continental Alloys and Services Inc. in Houston for wrongfully firing an employee• Allegation: A whistleblower investigation by the department’s

Occupational Safety and Health Administration found sufficient evidence to support a former employee’s allegation that Continental Alloys and Services wrongfully fired the worker after she complained to management about OSHA 300 log reporting deficiencies. The law requires employers to record on-the-job injuries. The former employee reported several alleged instances where injuries were not reported. In an attempt to gather evidence of the reporting deficiencies, the employee recorded a meeting with the individual responsible for reporting the injuries. These actions led to the employee’s termination

Press Releases

• Baytown, Texas, steel manufacturer failed to train workers properly and implement audit procedures for metal cutting machine. JSW Steel (USA) Inc. cited for 12 violations; $126,000 in fines proposed• OSHA cited JSW Steel for one repeated violation, carrying a fine of

$70,000, for failure to conduct periodic inspections and develop lockout/tagout procedures to power off the shear safely, a large metal cutting machine, during machine maintenance and servicing. Inspectors also identified nine serious violations, with a proposed fine of $54,000, for failure to affix lockout or tagout safeguards on dangerous machinery and to train employees performing machine maintenance. JSW Steel also was cited for inadequate drenching or flushing facilities for workers exposed to injurious corrosive materials. The company also was cited for two other violations, with a $2,000 fine, for failure to mount fire extinguishers and replace a missing junction box.

Press Releases

• Boomerang Tube continues to expose workers to life-threatening hazards. OSHA cites Liberty, Texas, employer for 18 violations; fines total $283,600• Already in the SVEP for willful violations, Boomerang Tube LLC in Liberty

continued to put workers in harm's way and exposed them to unguarded machinery, failure to shut down machinery and other hazards, a July 2014 follow-up inspection by OSHA found. OSHA cited the company for 18 violations. Proposed penalties total $283,600. OSHA's Houston North Area Office cited Boomerang Tube for four repeat violations and a $154,000 penalty for failure to utilize lockout/tagout procedures when performing machine service or maintenance; not installing point of operation and general machine guarding; and failure to guard electrical panels, which potentially exposed workers to more than 50 electrical volts

Press Releases

• Boomerang Tube Continued…• OSHA assessed a $70,000 penalty for one willful violation. The agency

found that Boomerang Tube failed to protect workers from falls of heights from 4 to 15 feet in a storage yard and from an open-sided floor with no walls that exposed workers to falls to a lower level. The agency cited the company for 10 serious violations, with a $59,600 penalty, for failure to provide crane control markings to prevent the operator from moving the crane in the wrong direction and dropping the load; improperly using the lifting eye on the welder and not on other machinery; and failure to use fuel gas and oxygen cylinder valve protection caps. Additional serious violations included slip hazards; inadequate material storage; an unguarded grinder; and lack of covers for electrical outlets. Three other violations, with no monetary penalty, were cited for electrical hazards

Press Releases

• Boomerang Tube Continued…• Patterson Tubular Services, the employer of eight workers at the

Boomerang Tube facility, was cited for one serious violation for failure to utilize lockout/tagout procedures when performing machine maintenance. Proposed fines total $7,000 for the Channelview employer

Press Releases

• Explosion at Madden Bolt steel manufacturer kills worker. Workplace incident results in 2nd employee death in a year. Proposed fines totaling $44,800• A 31-year-old worker was the second person killed in a year at Madden Bolt

Corp. when a cutting-table explosion in August 2014 hurled the employee and a steel plate into the air. The plate then landed on the fallen worker OSHA determined. OSHA has cited the Houston-based employer for 10 serious violations. In September 2013, a forklift driver at Madden Bolt died after the machine turned over and pinned him underneath. The inspection after the explosion found serious violations which include failing to: ensure that the air and gas concentration in the cutting table did not accumulate to create an explosion; protect fuel cylinders from damage; place safety guards on band saws and a pipe press that exposed workers to being caught in the machinery; cover live electrical parts on equipment; and outline proper procedures to shut down equipment while performing maintenance

Press Releases

• Animal feed producer exposes workers to potential dust explosion and other hazards. OSHA cites Thomas Moore Feed of Navasota, Texas, for 18 violations• OSHA did an inspection following a complaint. OSHA cited Thomas Moore

Feed for not protecting workers from a potential dust explosion; allowing openings in the dust collection exhaust path of the hammer mill; failing to keep dust accumulations below 1/8 inch in a priority area; not maintaining a functioning monitoring device on the dust collector or making repairs to the dust collector; and not having an adequate dust emission source. The serious violations include failure to guard belts, pulleys, chains and sprockets less than 7 feet from the ground or platform; evaluate permit-required confined spaces; and outline procedures to prevent the unintended startup of machinery. Other violations involve failing to document forklift training; not identifying names on locks when a crew performs service or maintenance; and not providing information to employees wearing respirators

Press Releases

• Proper protections could have saved four DuPont workers killed by gas. Federal safety investigators find serious failures in 2014 toxic release in Texas• The department's Occupational Safety and Health Administration today

cited DuPont for 11 safety violations and identified scores of safety upgrades the company must undertake to prevent future accidents at its Lannate/API manufacturing building in La Porte. DuPont was cited for one repeat, nine serious and one other than serious OSHA violations. The repeat violation was assessed for not training employees on using the building's ventilation system and other safety procedures, such as how to respond if the fans stopped working. In July 2010, DuPont was cited for a similar violation.

Press Releases

• Deaths of four workers prompts deeper look at DuPont Safety Practices. OSHA conducts second inspection after Texas plant tragedy, finds serious, willful and repeat violations; DuPont placed in Severe Violator Enforcement Program • After the initial investigation into the four deaths, the Department of

Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration found hazards that prompted the inspection at the facility to be expanded under the National Emphasis Program for chemical facilities. OSHA issued citations to DuPont for three willful, one repeat and four serious violations at their chemical manufacturing plant in La Porte. The agency has proposed penalties of $273,000 for these new violations

Press Releases

• Workers risked dangerous falls at Shenandoah, Texas, worksite. OSHA cites employers Gate Precast Co. and Trueblue Inc.; fines total $74K• OSHA cited Gate Precast Co. for four serious and one repeat violation. The

serious violations include exposing workers to struck-by hazards, using a kinked wire rope to lift a load, failing to protect wire ropes from damage, and exposing employees to impalement. The repeat violation was for failing to protect employees and six temporary workers from fall hazards. Trueblue provided Gate Precast with six temporary workers and received two citations, for exposing workers to fall and impalement hazards, at the job site.

Press Releases

• Texas worker injured after being denied safety equipment; OSHA fines Cotton Commercial USA and Gardia Construction more than $367K• Despite his request for a safety harness, a temporary worker without fall

protection on a roof later fell 12 feet through the roof. His fall resulted in his hospitalization with fractured arms and severe contusions. The employer, Cotton Commercial USA Inc. in Katy, Texas, waited three days to report the injury, an investigation by OSHA found. Federal law requires employers to report such incidents within 24 hours. OSHA today fined Cotton Commercial $362,500 for seven safety violations, including one willful and four willful egregious. The violations include failing to provide fall protection for four workers, failure to promptly report the hospitalization of an employee resulting from a workplace incident, and not training employees in the use of fall protection and ladders. Gardia Construction, which provided the laborers to Cotton Commercial, received a citation for one serious violation and a fine of $4,900, for failing to conduct frequent and regular inspections of the job site where its laborers worked

Press Releases

• Trench collapse seriously injures worker, leads to $424K fine for employer. Hassell Construction cited for egregious safety violations in Richmond, Texas collapse• One minute he was working in the 8-foot trench below ground. The next,

he was being buried in it. His co-workers came to his rescue, digging him out with their bare hands. Moments after they pulled the injured man to safety, the unprotected trench collapsed again. His injuries were serious and led to his hospitalization. The man's Houston-area employer, Hassell Construction Co. Inc. knew the Richmond, Texas excavation site was dangerous, but failed to protect its workers. Today, OSHA cited Hassell Construction for 16 safety violations, including six egregious willful violations for failing to protect workers inside an excavation from a cave-in. The company faces penalties totaling $423,900.

Press Releases

• Hassell Construction Continued…• In addition to the willful violations, Hassell was cited for nine serious

violations, including failing to remove debris from the edge of the excavation. The company also did not provide a safe means to get in and out of the excavation for workers or conduct atmospheric testing inside excavations after a sewer leak. OSHA has placed the company in its Severe Violator Enforcement Program

Press Releases

• Workers at a Houston construction site exposed to excavation hazards. SER Construction Partners fined $79,900 for three safety violations• OSHA began the investigation in January under the National Emphasis

Program on Trenching and Excavations. SER Construction Partners Ltd. based out of Pasadena, Texas, specializes in heavy civil construction and employs about 370 employees. OSHA cited the employer for one repeat and two serious trenching violations. The serious violations include failing to provide a safe egress from the trench and failing to prevent water accumulation. The repeat violation involved failing to provide adequate cave-in protection such as sloping, benching or a protective shield system

Press Releases

• Ensign United States Drilling continues to expose workers to potential injury or death during oil well explosions • Ensign United States Drilling (S.W.) Inc. was cited with two repeat safety

violations by the U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration for exposing workers to possible hazards during oil well explosions. The inspection was part of OSHA's Regional Emphasis Program for the Upstream Oil and Gas Well Industry. The repeat violations were cited for failing to correct deficiencies found during a 2011 investigation. Proposed penalties total $65,000. The repeat violations were cited for obstruction of and damage to the Geronimo Line, which was blocked by a rack of pipes and contained four knots that could stop workers' full slide to safety during a fire or explosion

Press Releases

• Extreme heat claims day laborer's life at metal recycler OSHA cites Al Star Recycling in Houston for five serious violations• OSHA cited the employer for a serious violation for failing to implement a

heat management program for all workers exposed to excessive heat outdoors. The other four serious violations were for failing to provide forklift training, not implementing a hazard communication program and failing to guard a pedestal grinder that exposed workers to struck-by hazards. The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration initiated the June 2015 inspection after receiving information pertaining to the death of a 59-year-old Hispanic man who was hired for the day to sort aluminum cans outdoors. New workers are particularly susceptible to heat hazards before they have time to acclimatize. Proposed penalties of $13,800

Press Releases

• Acclimatizing employees beginning work in hot environment or those returning from an absence period of three or more days• Implementing a work/rest regimen that includes a

provision to allow employees to become acclimatized to extreme heat conditions• Providing a training program for all employees,

including temporary employees, day laborers, and part-time employees regarding the health effects associated with heat stress and recognizing symptoms and methods of prevention for heat-induced illnesses

Heat - What Should be Considered?

• Providing specific procedures to be followed for emergency situations and procedures for first aid to be administered immediately to employees displaying symptoms of injury or illness• Using dermal patches for monitoring core temperature

to better identify when workers need to be removed from the work area• Providing cool water and encouraging employees to

drink 5-7 ounces of water every 10 to 15 minutes• Providing shaded areas where heat-affected employees

may take their breaks and/or recover

Heat - What Should be Considered?

Questions?• Houston North Area Office Joann Figueroa, Area Director

Jim Shelton, CAS690 S. Loop 336 W., Suite 400Conroe, TX 77304

[email protected]

• Keep up to date with the Houston North Area Office email list. Contact Jim Shelton at the above email

mailto:[email protected]

Disclaimer

• This information has been developed by an OSHA Compliance Assistance Specialist and is intended to assist employers, workers, and others as they strive to improve workplace health and safety. While we attempt to thoroughly address specific topics [or hazards], it is not possible to include discussion of everything necessary to ensure a healthy and safe working environment in a presentation of this nature. Thus, this information must be understood as a tool for addressing workplace hazards, rather than an exhaustive statement of an employer’s legal obligations, which are defined by statute, regulations, and standards. Likewise, to the extent that this information references practices or procedures that may enhance health or safety, but which are not required by a statute, regulation, or standard, it cannot, and does not, create additional legal obligations. Finally, over time, OSHA may modify rules and interpretations in light of new technology, information, or circumstances; to keep apprised of such developments, or to review information on a wide range of occupational safety and health topics, you can visit OSHA’s website at www.osha.gov.

FY 2015 OSHA and Houston Update

Documents

Transcript of FY 2015 OSHA and Houston Update