OSHA Extends Deadline for Submitting Comments on MSD Rule by 15 Days

OSHA has just announced that it is extending by 15 days the public comment period for its proposal to add a separate column on the OSHA 300 log for employers to record work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).  Those wishing to comment on the proposed rule must now do so by March 30, 2010.  Four separate stakeholders had requested an extension of the comment period. 

Under the proposed rule, employers would be required to “check the box” in a separate column on the OSHA 300 log – an “MSD” column – for injuries and illnesses that fit within the agency’s definition. For purposes of the proposal, the agency defines MSDs as:

[D]isorders of the muscles, nerves, tendons, ligaments, joints, cartilage and spinal discs. MSDs DO NOT include disorders caused by slips, trips, falls, motor vehicle accidents, or other similar accidents. Examples of MSDs include: Carpal tunnel syndrome, Rotator Cuff syndrome, De Quervain’s disease, Trigger finger, Tarsal tunnel syndrome, Sciatica, Epicondylitis, Tendinitis, Raynaud’s phenomenon, Carpet layers knee, Herniated spinal disc, and Low back pain.

OSHA also is proposing to remove existing language from its recordkeeping compliance directive that “minor musculoskeletal discomfort” is not recordable as a restricted work case “if a health care professional determines that the employee is fully able to perform all of his or her routine job functions, and the employer assigns a work restriction for the purpose of preventing a more serious injury.” OSHA is concerned that this language creates confusion among employers about recording MSDs. OSHA’s proposal attempts to clarify that employers must record abnormal conditions resulting in minor musculoskeletal discomfort, regardless of whether the conditions include objective signs of an injury or illness – so long as all of the other criteria for recording are met.

This is an important rulemaking and all stakeholders are encouraged to participate in the rulemaking process.

OSHA Proposes to Restore MSD Column on "300 Log"

In a move sure to be viewed by some as a prelude to a new ergonomics rulemaking, OSHA has proposed adding a separate column on the OSHA 300 log for employers to record work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). (The initial 2001 recordkeeping final rule had included an MSD column, but OSHA later deleted that column before the provision ever became effective.) The rule also proposes the same definition of “MSDs” that OSHA had included in the initial 2001 final rule. 

This is an important and fast-moving rulemaking. Interested stakeholders are encouraged to review the proposal thoroughly and provide comments to the agency. The comment period ends on March 15, 2010; the agency is holding a public meeting on the proposal on March 9, 2010.

Under the proposed rule, employers would be required to “check the box” in a separate column on the OSHA 300 log – an “MSD” column – for injuries and illnesses that fit within the agency’s definition. For purposes of the proposal, the agency defines MSDs as:

[D]isorders of the muscles, nerves, tendons, ligaments, joints, cartilage and spinal discs. MSDs DO NOT include disorders caused by slips, trips, falls, motor vehicle accidents, or other similar accidents. Examples of MSDs include: Carpal tunnel syndrome, Rotator Cuff syndrome, De Quervain’s disease, Trigger finger, Tarsal tunnel syndrome, Sciatica, Epicondylitis, Tendinitis, Raynaud’s phenomenon, Carpet layers knee, Herniated spinal disc, and Low back pain.

OSHA also is proposing to remove existing language from its recordkeeping compliance directive that “minor musculoskeletal discomfort” is not recordable as a restricted work case “if a health care professional determines that the employee is fully able to perform all of his or her routine job functions, and the employer assigns a work restriction for the purpose of preventing a more serious injury.” OSHA is concerned that this language creates confusion among employers about recording MSDs. OSHA’s proposal attempts to clarify that employers must record abnormal conditions resulting in minor musculoskeletal discomfort, regardless of whether the conditions include objective signs of an injury or illness – so long as all of the other criteria for recording are met.

OSHA describes this proposed rule as a non-significant regulatory action involving only two small costs for employers. OSHA believes that:

1.      employers – and specifically a human resources specialist – will be required to spend 5 minutes familiarizing themselves with the rule; and  

2.      employers will need to spend one additional minute than they currently spend in analyzing an injury or illness to determine whether it should be classified as an “MSD” and put into the correct column on the new recordkeeping forms.

OSHA’s action takes the agency back a decade to the end of the Clinton Administration, when OSHA completed its revised recordkeeping rule with a separate MSD column. Of course, many stakeholders will ask if this move signals a return to the other Clinton Administration rulemaking on MSDs: ergonomics. That rule was rescinded by Congress and President Bush under the Congressional Review Act.  OSHA’s leadership has insisted that this rulemaking is totally separate from any ergonomics initiative and should not be interpreted as a first step to a new ergonomics rule. However matters may develop on ergonomics, this rulemaking is important in its own right as it affects – by OSHA’s own count – approximately 1.5 million workplaces around the country.

OSHA: A Review of 2009

In 2009, OSHA emerged from the regulatory and enforcement shell that had shrouded it during the eight years of the Bush Administration. Once confirmed, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis announced that a “new Sheriff” was in town, who would refocus the Department of Labor – including OSHA – on tough enforcement and aggressive rulemaking. In both areas, OSHA delivered on Secretary Solis’s promise.

            OSHA Increases Enforcement

Many critics of OSHA during the Bush Administration focused on the seeming “emphasis” on cooperative programs and compliance assistance, at the expense of strong enforcement. In response, the Department of Labor announced in 2009 the hiring of hundreds of additional compliance officers (CSHOs) to refocus the Agency on what many believe is its core mission – enforcing occupational safety and health standards. It also initiated or revamped several new National Emphasis Programs (NEPs) to further focus CSHOs on certain safety and health issues and hazards:

Chemical Facilities National Emphasis Program. OSHA initiated a new NEP to focus enforcement resources on process safety management (PSM) hazards in chemical facilities across the country. The NEP, effective July 27, 2009, is billed as a “new approach for inspecting PSM covered facilities” and “allows for a greater number of inspections by better allocation of OSHA’s resources.”  In its instructions to compliance officers regarding the scope of inspections, OSHA emphasizes implementation of the PSM standard over documentation. Paper programs are not enough and OSHA will make sure that employers are fully implementing their PSM programs.

Recordkeeping National Emphasis Program. In the fall of 2009, OSHA launched its long-awaited Recordkeeping NEP. The NEP subjects employers in certain industries to comprehensive injury and illness records reviews. The purpose of the NEP is to ascertain whether, and to what extent, employers are under-recording injuries and illnesses at the worksite. OSHA cites several recent studies in the NEP asserting under-recording by employers on OSHA 300 logs. The NEP is designed to “identify and correct under-recorded and incorrectly recorded cases.” Employers subjected to an NEP inspection will face what are likely to be the most comprehensive inspections in the history of the Agency, with detailed records reviews, interviews of numerous employees, and an analysis of employer safety incentive programs and the effect of these programs on the reporting of injuries and illnesses.

Facilities that Manufacture Food Flavorings Containing Diacetyl National Emphasis Program. After focusing for years on the hazards of occupational exposure to diacetyl in microwave popcorn production, OSHA finally shifted its focus with respect to diacetyl to employers who manufacture food flavorings containing diacetyl. OSHA cites a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) study finding seven cases of bronchiolitis obliterans – a lung disease associated with exposure to diacetyl – in employees working in facilities where flavorings are manufactured. As part of the NEP, OSHA identifies eighty three facilities for inspection and provides detailed guidance for compliance officers to determine the extent to which these facilities are in overall compliance with their obligations.

Perhaps the most eagerly anticipated – and discussed – enforcement initiative was not an NEP at all, but was related to OSHA enforcement procedures for high to very high occupational exposure to the 2009 H1N1 virus. H1N1 captivated the world this past year, and OSHA spent significant resources addressing the occupational safety and health side of the issue. In the spring and summer of 2009, OSHA responded to the H1N1 outbreak by reissuing and repackaging guidance documents on pandemic influenza that had been previously developed. In November, however, OSHA went further and announced inspection procedures for certain high-hazard H1N1 workplaces, including hospitals, emergency medical centers, doctors’ and dental offices and clinics.

A More Active Regulatory Agenda

In 2009, OSHA also set a course for more activity in the rulemaking arena. As with enforcement, many stakeholders were critical of the Bush Administration’s perceived lack of investment in OSHA’s regulatory agenda. The two most significant regulatory accomplishments during the Bush Administration were the final Hexavalent Chromium rule and the final Employer Payment for PPE rule. Many stakeholders, however, argued that even these accomplishments were essentially forced on the Agency by the federal courts. Whether this is true or not, the first year of the Obama Administration saw the announcement of several new regulatory initiatives and what is even more stunning is that these initiatives were announced without a permanent political head of the Agency.

In 2009, OSHA announced new rulemakings for combustible dust hazards and airborne infectious diseases. OSHA also announced that it would revisit in a new rulemaking the definition of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and how WMSDs should be recorded on OSHA 300 logs. This year OSHA also published its proposed rule to update its hazard communication standard. The hazard communication proposal is one of the most significant OSHA rulemakings in over a decade. OSHA is proposing to revise its hazard communication standard to align it with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). If finalized, the rule would affect over 5 million business establishments across the country and potentially over 120 million employees. Over 40 million employees would need to be trained on hazard communication under the proposal. OSHA estimates the annualized compliance costs will be almost $100 million for employers. Annualized benefits are estimated to be approximately $850 million.

Finally, in 2009 OSHA made significant progress on its Cranes and Derricks in Construction proposed rule. OSHA’s proposal was over five years in the making. It was developed by the Agency through negotiated rulemaking, whereby representatives of employers and organized labor work together with OSHA to develop a draft rule. Consensus was reached by the negotiated rulemaking committee in 2004. OSHA held public hearings on the proposed rule in 2009 and Agency staff have been busy reviewing comments received with the goal of issuing a final rule in 2010.

All of this in just over 11 months. And yet, this is likely just the beginning for OSHA as 2010 is expected to bring greater enforcement and regulation. 

(More to come on what to expect in 2010 in the next blog post.)

New OSHA Recordkeeping Courses Available

Jackson Lewis and SmartPros Ltd. are pleased to announce the availability of two OSHA recordkeeping courses.  The first is Course 2215, OSHA’s Record-Keeping NEP:  What It Is and What You Need to Do to Prepare, which explains OSHA’s Recordkeeping NEP in detail.  The second is Course 2210, The OSHA Record-Keeping "Great Eight," which goes through eight key principles for OSHA recordkeeping compliance.

In addition, click here to view a recent interview on occupational safety and health issues prepared and produced by the Financial Management Network (FMN).  The interview covers H1N1, hazard communication, safety and health management systems, OSHA's Recordkeeping NEP, and other hot topics.

Attention on Under-recording of Injuries and Illnesses Grows with Release of GAO Report

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released an analysis of OSHA's efforts to ensure that work-related injuries and illnesses are properly recorded by employers.  Members of Congress had requested that the GAO determine (1) whether DOL verifies that employers are accurately recording workers' injuries and illnesses and, if so, the adequacy of these efforts, and (2) what factors may affect the accuracy of employers' injury and illness records.  The GAO study is another piece of the "under-recording puzzle" that is the focus of great attention by OSHA.

The GAO concludes that there are several deficiencies in OSHA's recordkeeping audit verification program in terms of the ability of the audits to determine if employers are accurately recording injuries and illnesses that occur at the worksite:

  • OSHA does not always require inspectors to interview workers about injuries and illnesses.
  • Many workers are no longer employed at the worksite and therefore cannot be interviewed. 
  • OSHA does not review the accuracy of injury and illness records for worksites in eight high hazard industries because it has not updated the codes used to identify the industries in its recordkeeping rule.

The GAO also identifies disincentives to workers reporting injuries and illnesses, including fear of job loss or other disciplinary action and fear of jeopardizing rewards based on having low injury and illness rates.  The GAO also surveys U.S. health practitioners and concludes that over a third of them have been subjected to pressure from employers or workers to provide insufficient medical treatment to avoid the need to record injuries or illnesses.

In response to its findings, the GAO makes four recommendations to OSHA:

  • Require inspectors to interview workers during records audits and substitute other workers when those initially selected are unavailable.
  • Minimize the time between the date injuries and illnesses are recorded by employers and the date they are audited.
  • Update the list of high hazard industries used to select worksites for records audits.
  • Increase education and training to help employers better understand the recordkeeping requirements.

OSHA agreed with all the recommendations.  It stated that it would require inspectors to interview employees during records audits and develop policies to conduct audits in a timely fashion.  It also stated that it would pursue rulemaking to update the industry coverage of the recordkeeping rule from SIC codes to NAICS codes.  Finally, it committed to supplement its current outreach efforts on recordkeeping compliance.

Of course, OSHA has also implemented its Recordkeeping NEP, which will focus OSHA enforcement resources on investigating the extent to which employers are under-recording injuries and illnesses.

Employers must take steps now to ensure that they have been, and are, accurately recording injuries and illnesses that occur at work.   

  

 

OSHA's Recordkeeping National Emphasis Program

OSHA has launched its long-awaited Recordkeeping National Emphasis Program (NEP).  Effective September 30, the NEP will subject employers in certain industries to comprehensive injury and illness records reviews.  Employers in the targeted industries should take time now to review their recordkeeping logs and practices to prepare for an NEP inspection.

Here is a special report on the NEP, including a description of its scope, the conduct of inspections, and the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders under the program. 

 

OSHA Starts Recordkeeping National Emphasis Program

OSHA has released its much anticipated recordkeeping National Emphasis Program (NEP).  It became effective September 30.  Click here to see the NEP.

We will be reviewing the document carefully and pass along to you the key aspects of the program.   

OSHA Enforcement Update

In a speech recently before the Small Business Administration’s safety and health forum in Washington, DC, Richard E. Fairfax, OSHA’s Director of Enforcement and Construction Programs, provided an update on the agency’s key enforcement initiatives. Of particular note, Mr. Fairfax stated:

  • OSHA will be issuing another update to its Field Operations Manual (FOM) in November 2009. The FOM guides OSHA’s compliance officers in the conduct of their inspections.

     
  • OSHA’s Enhanced Enforcement Program (EEP) is being revised to focus on fatalities, serious hazards and hazards identified in OSHA’s National Emphasis Programs, and to mandate follow-up inspections.

     
  • The following NEPs are now in the works: food flavorings; primary metals; hexavalent chromium; and recordkeeping.

OSHA also has issued two important new enforcement documents. The Site Specific Targeting Program (SST) for 2009, “is OSHA’s main programmed inspection plan for non-construction workplaces that have 40 or more employees.” To compile the SST, OSHA surveyed 80,000 large employers in historically high-rate industries, requiring them to report their injury and illness rates. Employers in manufacturing who reported a particularly high “Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred (DART) Rate” (over 8.0) or “Days Away from Work Injury and Illness (DAFWII) Case Rate” (over 6.0) should expect an SST inspection within the next year. Non-manufacturing employers who reported a DART Rate over 15.0 or DAFWII Rate over 13.0 also should expect an inspection under the SST. Nursing and personal care facilities are treated separately under the SST and will be subject to an inspection if they reported a DART Rate over 17.0 or a DAFWII Rate over 14.0.

OSHA also reissued its petroleum refinery NEP. This continues OSHA’s focus on enforcing its process safety management (PSM) standard in refineries. Employers in NAICS code 324110 should review their PSM programs in anticipation of an OSHA inspection of their facilities.

George Washington University Professor David Michaels to be Nominated to Head OSHA

President Barack Obama has announced he intends to nominate Professor David Michaels to be the Assistant Secretary of OSHA. Professor Michaels is the interim chair of the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at the George Washington University School of Public Health in Washington, D.C. If confirmed, Professor Michaels will join Acting Assistant Secretary of OSHA Jordan Barab in the political leadership of the safety and health agency.

In addition to his current position with George Washington University, Professor Michaels has a long history in public health. During the Clinton Administration, Professor Michaels was Assistant Secretary for Environment Safety and Health at the Department of Energy, where he played a role in overseeing safety and health issues for employees at nuclear weapons facilities.

While it is too early to predict Professor Michaels’s likely priorities, in past writings, he has indicated the need for OSHA:  (1) to issue a workplace injury and illness prevention program rule; and (2) to develop an electronic recordkeeping and reporting system. Both would further past and present OSHA initiatives.  

During the Clinton Administration, OSHA developed, but never issued, a Safety and Health Program rule which would have required employers to implement a broader process for preventing injuries and illnesses in the workplace. Should Professor Michaels be confirmed, he may press his interest in an injury and illness prevention program rule, likely reigniting discussions regarding the need for employers to implement safety and health programs at their worksites. 

A potential electronic recordkeeping system also fits neatly into OSHA’s current enforcement efforts. OSHA will be releasing a Recordkeeping National Emphasis Program (NEP) in the next few weeks, which will focus enforcement resources on recordkeeping inspections in certain establishments. OSHA will perform thorough records reviews and investigate the extent to which employers may be discouraging workers from reporting injuries and illnesses. The Department is intent on rooting out underreporting.  An electronic recordkeeping system could make it easier for the agency to monitor worksite injuries and illnesses and possible underreporting.

No information has been released as to when Professor Michaels’s confirmation hearings may be held. This announcement, however, may calm the uncertainty that had been swirling around OSHA as to who would be the permanent political head of the agency.

We will, of course, continue to keep you apprised of developments with respect to the nomination.

OSHA's Recordkeeping National Emphasis Program - Are You Prepared?

When OSHA launches its recordkeeping National Emphasis Program (NEP) later this year, employers cannot accuse the agency of inadequate warning. Since early March, OSHA officials have signaled the impending NEP. Employers should take time now to review their OSHA recordkeeping logs and practices to prepare for an NEP inspection.

Just last week, OSHA reminded us how seriously it is taking recordkeeping and the perceived underreporting of occupational injuries and illnesses. The Bureau of National Affairs (BNA) reported on remarks by Acting Assistant Secretary of OSHA, Jordan Barab, at the annual American Society of Safety Engineers convention in San Antonio: 

Barab said OSHA’s pending recordkeeping National Emphasis Program will scrutinize companies in high-risk industries that post strikingly low accident and injury rates. OSHA inspectors will look not only at a company’s records but also its safety policies, he said. In particular, agency inspectors will look for companies that discourage their employees from reporting workplace accidents, Barab said. 

The recordkeeping NEP will involve more than just a standard records review. Employer programs that “discourage” employees from reporting workplace accidents will be targeted by OSHA. Unfortunately, OSHA has not provided additional information on the types of programs it is concerned about. However, OSHA had a provision in the Clinton Administration’s ergonomics standard, which was revoked by Congress and President Bush in 2001, which sought to address a similar concern. OSHA required in that rule that employers not develop policies that discourage the reporting of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). In the preamble to the final rule, OSHA suggested that the following could run afoul of this provision: 

  • Disciplining employees for reporting injuries, without considering the cause of those injuries;
  • Establishing incentive programs that offer rewards to employees or groups of employees based on a low number of reported injuries;
  • Implementing programs where manager or supervisor performance reviews or bonuses are tied to the number of reported injuries and illnesses; and
  • Instituting drug testing programs, when applied to all workers who report MSDs.

Employers should prepare for an OSHA recordkeeping inspection by taking some time to: 

  • Review their 300 logs and 301 incident reports for accuracy;
  • Ensure their 300 logs reflect information from the 301 incident reports; and
  • Compare all their OSHA recordkeeping forms with any workers’ compensation reports and claims.

As important, employers should look at their safety incentive programs and injury and illness reporting procedures for any evidence that these protocols are discouraging employee reports.

 

Roger Kaplan, a Partner in Jackson Lewis's Long Island office, contributed to this Post. 

OSHA Mandates Recordkeeping for Team Building Event

In a new letter of interpretation, OSHA has confirmed that injuries to employees sustained at off-site team-building events are recordable on OSHA logs, so long as the injuries also meet other general recording criteria (such as requiring medical treatment beyond first aid). Employers are encouraged to review their recordkeeping practices to ensure that they are complying with this interpretation of OSHA’s recordkeeping rule.

OSHA was asked whether an injury incurred while an employee was go-cart racing at an off-site team-building activity was “work-related” under OSHA’s rule. In the scenario presented to OSHA, employees were not required to participate in the go-cart racing or other team building events. However, they were required to attend an off-site meeting and luncheon. In OSHA’s view, the employee was at the go-cart facility as a condition of employment and thus was “in the work environment.” Any injury or illness that arises is therefore presumed to be work-related in the view of the Agency.

Employers often hold team-building events at locations outside the workplace. If injuries occur during these events, employers must record them on their OSHA logs, assuming the injuries meet other recordability criteria.

With OSHA developing a National Emphasis Program on recordkeeping, now is the time for employers to review their recordkeeping procedures and logs to ensure they are fully compliant.
 

OSHA National Emphasis Programs Under Development

Signaling its renewed focus on enforcement, OSHA has announced it is developing six new National Emphasis Programs (NEPs). NEPs focus OSHA’s resources on industries, hazards, and occupational injuries and illnesses that need additional targeted enforcement, in the Agency’s view.

OSHA’s Director of Enforcement Programs revealed the following industry-specific NEPs are in development:

 

  • Chemical plants – process safety management;
  • Primary metals;
  • Flavorings and diacetyl; and
  • Oil and gas well drilling.

Employers in these industries should expect additional inspections and take steps now to ensure their safety and health practices are fully compliant with OSHA requirements.

 

Even more employers, however, can anticipate increased scrutiny on account of OSHA’s recordkeeping initiative. As a result of questions raised by Congress and labor organizations that injuries and illnesses are underreported, OSHA announced it is developing a recordkeeping NEP. All employers who are required to keep OSHA injury and illness logs should review them now for accuracy, completeness, and appropriate certification.

 

Finally, OSHA is developing an NEP dealing with occupational asthma, a growing area of concern for OSHA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

 

In a recent speech, newly confirmed Secretary of Labor Solis committed OSHA to increased enforcement. These NEPs will drive much of that enforcement in coming months. 

Employers Must Record Injuries Resulting from "Horseplay" at Work

In a recent letter of interpretation addressing a common issue at worksites around the country, OSHA confirmed that injuries to employees sustained at the worksite as a result of “horseplay” are recordable on OSHA Logs, so long as the injuries also meet other general recording criteria (such as requiring medical treatment beyond first aid).

The interpretation stems from an incident described as “horseplay gone badly.” At the end of a work day, two supervisors got into a physical confrontation while changing to go home. One supervisor pulled a knife and stuck the other in the arm, resulting in several sutures.

OSHA stated that the injury was recordable. First, because the injury resulted from an event occurring in the work environment, it was presumed to be work-related and none of the exceptions to this “geographic presumption” applied. The exceptions include, among other things, injuries such as those resulting from an employee eating, drinking, or preparing food for personal consumption, those involving signs or symptoms that surface at work but result solely from a non-work-related event, and those caused by a motor vehicle accident occurring on a company parking lot while the employee is commuting to or from work. Second, because the injury required medical treatment beyond first aid, OSHA concluded that it satisfied the other recordability criteria related to severity.

OSHA dismissed as essentially irrelevant the issue of whether the injury resulted from activities that were “not directly productive” to the employer’s work. OSHA also reiterated that there is no general exception under the recordkeeping rule for violence that occurs at the worksite.

Situations such as this are all too common in the workplace. Aside from taking steps to address violence in the workplace generally, employers must ensure that when an incident occurs and injury results, it is properly recorded under OSHA’s rules, if warranted.