On Safety

The On Safety blog has moved.

OSHA Roundup for March 4, 2014

March 4, 2014


An increase in communication tower industry deaths is “unacceptable,” and proper safety precautions must be taken, OSHA chief David Michaels says.

OSHA lays out its Site-Specific Targeting Program for 2014.

Notable proposed fines

$560,000 to a Houston oil and gas industry product manufacturer for machine guarding violations following an investigation stemming from the crushing of a machine operator’s arms

$163,240 to a Pennsylvania foundry for repeat violations that include unguarded platforms and pulleys and electrical hazards, and serious violations for struck-by, fall, amputation and electrical hazards

$138,600 to a Georgia cement manufacturer for lockout/tagout violations

$106,000 to a Milwaukee-based manufacturing facility for a lack of machine guarding

$77,472 to a Wisconsin smelting plant in connection with a worker sickened by exposure to chlorine gas

$56,700 to a concrete product manufacturer in Wisconsin for violations related to the foot amputation of a worker

Happening this week

March 5 – Downstate Illinois Occupational Safety and Health Day

Review Counter

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

# of Days OSHA Proposal
13 Recording and Reporting Requirements – NAICS Update and Reporting Revisions (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.)