On Safety

The On Safety blog has moved.

OSHA Roundup for March 31, 2014

March 31, 2014


Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez defends OSHA’s pursuit of new permissible exposure limits for silica and backs the science behind the agency’s proposed rule, during a March 26 House Education and the Workforce Committee hearing.

OSHA’s ongoing series of public hearings on its proposed silica rule continue, with stakeholders voicing their opinions to the agency.

Noting that falls are the leading cause of death in construction, OSHA announces plans for an industry stand-down this June to focus on fall prevention.

Notable proposed fines

$168,600 to two Ohio companies for allegedly exposing workers to dangerous levels of lead and to fall hazards

$63,360 to an asphalt company in Florida for confined space and lockout/tagout violations related to an incident in which an employee suffered severe burns after being trapped in hot liquid asphalt

Happening this week

March 18 to April 4 – A series of public hearings on OSHA’s proposed Silica Standard concludes

March 31 – Deadline to submit comments for OSHA’s proposed rule that would revise its Process Safety Management Standard

Review Counter

Below is a count of how many days recent OSHA proposals have been under review, as of March 31:

# of Days OSHA Proposal
40 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.)