In a recent interpretation letter, OSHA responded to an employer’s request for “clarification on whether an employee’s laceration and subsequent fainting at the sight of blood constitutes a recordable case on the OSHA Form 300.”

The employee had scratched his finger on a vinyl saw clamp at work. The injury was minor and the only

OSHA announced this week a shift in how it will evaluate inspections, recognizing that inspections are not all equal and that more-complex inspections deserve more weight. The complexity of an inspection affects the amount of time, manpower and other resources required by OSHA and this new tiered inspection system will reflect this complexity. Under the

OSHA’s new reporting requirements began on January 1, 2015. Under these requirements, employers in federal OSHA jurisdiction are required to report to OSHA any work-related fatality or any work-related injury resulting in an employee being formally admitted to the hospital or any work-related amputation or loss of an eye. Since the implementation of these new

In an interpretation letter dated June 1, 2015, OSHA answered the question “Under OSHA regulations 29 CFR 1926.95(a) who is responsible for the laundering of fire retarding clothing that is provided to employees?” The section states that protective equipment “shall be provided, used, and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition” but does not elaborate

OSHA’s National Emphasis Program (“NEP”) on Amputations has been in effect since 2006 but on August 13th the Agency issued an updated NEP (CPL 03-00-019) that significantly expands the industries targeted for inspections.  The updated NEP applies to general industry workplaces in which any machinery or equipment likely to cause amputations is present.  According to

On July 20, 2015, OSHA published a long awaited Directive on the revised Hazard Communication Standard (“HCS”), Inspection Procedures for the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS 2012), CPL 02-02-079. The Directive is intended to provide inspection and enforcement guidance to compliance officers regarding the final Hazard Communication Standard published in March 2012. However, the Directive

Authored by:  Linda Otaigbe

OSHA has recently issued several memoranda updating guidance on its Process Safety Management (“PSM”) standard. On June 5, 2015, OSHA issued a memorandum to Regional Administrators explaining how inspectors should enforce recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices (“RAGAGEP”) requirements. Among other things, OSHA explained that when an employer’s internal standards

On May 4, 2015, OSHA published the Confined Spaces in Construction standard, 29 C.F.R 1926, Subpart AA.  The new standard is effective August 3, 2015.  Several interested stakeholders petitioned the agency for a delay in the August enforcement date citing the  need for additional time to train employees and obtain the necessary equipment to comply

OSHA issues new guidance to Regional Administrators and State Plan Designees on the enforcement of the Process Safety Management (PSM) standard’s recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices (RAGAGEP) requirements. The new guidance clarifies OSHA’s positions with respect to enforcing the PSM standards that reference or imply the use of RAGAGEP. The memorandum provides the most detailed information on how OSHA will handle PSM inspections with respect to the RAGAGEP requirements and it includes 16 detailed enforcement considerations that inspectors will evaluate when reviewing an employer’s compliance. The memorandum also provides specific guidance on when citations may be issued.

Employers covered under 29 C.F.R. § 1910.119 should carefully review their compliance with the following standards in light of this new guidance and OSHA’s renewed focus on the proper application of RAGAGEP to covered processes and equipment:

  • 119(d)(3)(ii) – The employer shall document that equipment complies with RAGAGEP.
  • 119(d)(3)(III) – For existing equipment designed and constructed in accordance with codes, standards, or practices that are no longer in general use, the employer shall determine and document that the equipment is designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operating in a safe manner.
  • 119(j)(4)(ii) – Inspection and testing procedures shall follow RAGAGEP.
  • 119(j)(4)(iii) – The frequency of inspections and tests of process equipment shall be consistent with applicable manufacturers’ recommendations and good engineering practices, and more frequently if determined to be necessary by prior operating experience.

Issuance of this memorandum signals that inspectors will be looking more closely at these requirements during PSM-related inspections and that they will specifically be looking for information on whether employers have identified and documented the appropriate RAGAGEP that applies to each piece of equipment and are following the inspection and testing requirements including frequency of those inspections and tests.Continue Reading Eight Tips for Addressing OSHA’s New Enforcement Guidance on RAGAGEP under the Process Safety Management Standard

A memorandum dated April 2, 2015 from Thomas Galassi, Directorate of Enforcement Programs, reminded Regional Administrators that the National Emphasis Program (NEP) on Nursing and Residential Care Facilities, was expiring, effective April 5, 2015.   (The NEP had focused on specific hazards such as ergonomics, bloodborne pathogens, tuberculosis, workplace violence, and slips, trips, and falls in