On Safety

Sign up to be notified by email about new posts on this blog.


Subscribe to the RSS feed

On Safety

OSHA Roundup for April 4, 2016

April 4, 2016
Reprints

News

Is OSHA ignoring congressional intent, as one senator claims? Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez explains why not.

Employers who violate “non-serious” OSHA rules should not be fined, the House Budget Committee suggests.

OSHA updates its face and eye protection rules to reflect more recent voluntary consensus standards.

An employer who lied to OSHA during a worker death investigation has been sentenced to 10 months in prison.

Notable proposed fines

$193,600 to a Kansas candy manufacturing facility in connection with a hazardous chemical release

$174,000 to a Pittsburgh-based plumbing contractor for the death of a worker buried in a trench collapse

$152,460 to a wood pellet manufacturer in Wisconsin for combustible dust hazards and lockout/tagout violations.

$122,500 to a chicken production plant in Texas for Process Safety Management violations related to the release of a hazardous chemical

$117,000 to a garden store chain in Houston for several violations – including electrical, industrial trucks and chemical – found during an inspection prompted by an employee fall from a forklift

$79,600 to a Johnson City, NY-based food products manufacturing plant for confined spaces violations in connection with serious injuries suffered by a worker being overcome while cleaning the inside of a vinegar-filled tank

$44,000 to a Missouri manufacturer for guarding violations following the amputation of a worker’s arm

$41,504 to a Florida wire manufacturer for guarding violations after the tip of a worker’s right index finger was amputated

Review Counter

Below is a count of how many days recent OSHA proposals have been under review, as of April 4:

# of Days OSHA Proposal
 
182 Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses (final rule)

The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs – part of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget – reviews proposed regulations. The process is required for most rules before they can move forward, and typically takes 90 days.

The opinions expressed in "On Safety" do not necessarily reflect those of the National Safety Council or affiliated local Chapters.

Post a comment to this article

Safety+Health welcomes comments that promote respectful dialogue. Please stay on topic. Comments that contain personal attacks, profanity or abusive language – or those aggressively promoting products or services – will be removed. We reserve the right to determine which comments violate our comment policy.

(Anonymous comments are welcome; merely skip the “name” field in the comment box. An email address is required but will not be included with your comment.)