The West Chemical and Fertilizer plant near Waco, Texas, may have been claiming an exemption to OSHA’s Process Safety Management (PSM) standard, according to reporting done by The Center for Public Integrity (CPI). OSHA’s PSM standard requires companies to properly manage hazards associated with processes using highly hazardous chemicals.

The exemption allows “retail facilities” to be exempt from PSM. To be considered a retail facility, more than half of the establishment’s income must be obtained from direct sales to end users. In the case of a fertilizer manufacturer, that could be accomplished by selling directly to farms.

This exemption was written into OSHA’s PSM standard as it appeared in the Federal Register (FR) on Feb. 24, 1992.

On top of that, The Fertilizer Institute, which bills itself as “the leading voice in the fertilizer industry,” asked OSHA to clarify that part of the PSM standard, shortly after it was published in the FR. In June 1992, OSHA issued a Standard Interpretation Letter, addressed to the Fertilizer Institute, confirming the exemption.

By being exempt from PSM, the West fertilizer plant wasn’t subject to OSHA inspections targeted to facilities covered under the standard.

And here’s the catch-22: OSHA doesn’t check on the validity of an exemption unless it inspects the site. Of course, the site was less likely to be inspected because of the exemption.

OSHA is also looking into whether the West facility was exempted from keeping injury and illness logs because it claimed it had fewer than 10 full-time employees. Once again, this would potentially subject the plant to fewer inspections. OSHA uses its Site Specific Targeting program to choose facilities to inspect because their OSHA logs show they had significantly more injuries and illnesses than the industry average.

Investigations into fertilizer plant explosion ongoing

What does the Fertilizer Institute think about the retail exemption in light of the explosion and deaths?

The institute notes the cause of the explosion hasn’t been determined. An OSHA inspection typically takes five to six months. But, the institute also says, “We will re-examine our stance if necessary when the report on the cause is made final.”

Besides being investigated by OSHA, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) has also sent investigators to the scene.

Over its history, the CSB has investigated many of the worst industrial incidents in the U.S. involving worker deaths and serious injuries. What’s a common cause of these incidents? Deficient Process Safety Management:

• “We found serious deficiencies in the company’s process safety management program.” (Bayer CropScience Facility explosion that killed two workers, 2008)
• “Refinery Had Longstanding Process Safety Deficiencies.” (U.S. Chemical Safety Board Concludes “Organizational and Safety Deficiencies at All Levels of the BP Corporation” Caused March 2005 Texas City Disaster That Killed 15, Injured 180.)
• “Borden Chemical did not implement 1992 PHA (process hazard analysis as required by OSHA’s PSM standard) recommendations.” (Formosa Plastics Vinyl Chloride Explosion that killed five workers in 2004.)

Given that history, there’s a high likelihood the CSB’s report on the fertilizer plant explosion will contain recommendations regarding adherence to OSHA’s PSM standard.

What do you think about the so-called “retail exemption” to OSHA’s PSM standard? Let us know in the comments below.

The post Fertilizer plant explosion: Did facility have safety exemption? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Neil Shaw, currently BP’s COO for global projects, made that statement as part of his testimony in the trial to determine BP’s liability for the rig explosion that killed 11 workers and caused the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

Of course, the places we’ve heard the “safety is our top priority” phrase before are:

• our own workplaces
• other workplaces
• from executives who speak at safety conferences, and
• just about anywhere in the business world when an executive is asked the question, “How does employee safety figure into your organization?”

It’s cliché.

Oh, many business people actually mean it. They’re the ones who, every day, send their employees home in the same condition they came into work because of their commitment to safety.

Just how cliché is the phrase? It’s so cliché that executives had to develop a new one.

Have you heard this one? “Priorities can change. Therefore, safety is a value at our company. Values don’t change.”

That line has been bouncing around for at least a few years now. It has also reached cliché status.

Words are words without actions to back them up. Just what do the words “safety is our top priority” mean, and how does a company really show that?

‘Safety was on decline for years’

Getting back to BP for a moment Shaw also stated at the trial that when he took the job with responsibility for Gulf of Mexico drilling in 2008, safety performance had been on the decline for years, and he set out to get it back on track.

Two years later, on April 20, 2010, Deepwater Horizon happened.

Shaw says he implemented a new safety plan for BP’s Gulf of Mexico drilling sites in 2009. He says his team reviewed every single personal and process safety incident on a weekly basis.

But an expert testifying for the plaintiffs in the trial said BP never fully implemented the plan.

Shaw said in his weekly meetings with other BP executives, “The first thing we always talked about was safety.”

Too bad that’s also become a cliché.

‘Every ______ counts’

Plaintiffs have argued at the trial that BP sacrificed safety for production. They point to BP’s mantra at the time, “Every dollar counts,” as proof.

In this post, we’ve been pretty critical of clichés. But, as long as BP was going to use one about what really counts, maybe another six-letter word instead of “dollar” would have served the company better: “Every person counts.”

What’s interesting about the news coverage of of Shaw’s testimony is that he seems to speak about safety in the abstract. It’s a thing … something you do at work.

It might have been illuminating to challenge Shaw to remember, since he talked about them every week, one specific safety incident involving a particular employee. If it was a serious injury (one that required a hospital visit), could he remember the employee’s name? What job did the person do for BP? How did the injury happen? What did the company do to make sure that type of injury was less likely to happen again?

More than spouting clichés, like “safety is our top priority” and “we begin every meeting with safety,” knowing those sort of facts about his company’s safety record would have been a better test of a BP executive’s commitment to workplace safety, because, after all, safety is about people.

What’s your experience been with top executives regarding their commitment to safety? Do they spout similar clichés without backing up their words with actions? Do you have an example of executives showing they had real commitments to safety? Share you stories in the comment box below.

The post BP exec: ‘Safety is our top priority’ — Where have we heard this before? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Edward Tarver, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Georgia, said there wasn’t enough evidence of intentional disregard or plain indifference to the requirements of OSHA’s general housekeeping standards to charge Imperial Sugar with a criminal violation.

Tarver said the lack of federal criminal laws “specifically addressed to the safety of workers within the sugar industry at the time of the Imperial Sugar explosion” also factored into his decision.

Also, there are no felony provisions under the statute that covers OSHA housekeeping offenses. Maximum charges would be misdemeanors, with fines topping out at $500,000.

The Department of Labor requested Tarver’s office consider criminal prosecution.

OSHA issued 124 safety citations against Imperial, 118 of them categorized as willful, which means the company acted with “plain indifference to, or intentional disregard for, employee safety and health.” The original OSHA fines totaled $8.77 million, but the company settled with the federal agency for $6 million, almost a one-third reduction.

So despite OSHA’s finding of plain indifference or intentional disregard, the U.S. Attorney’s office couldn’t come to the same conclusion.

But in interviews conducted by OSHA, plant workers said they were never trained on how to escape during an emergency, according to The Savannah Morning News.

Investigations by OSHA, the U.S. Chemical Safety board and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives all reached similar conclusions: Sugar dust, suspended in the air, was the fuel for the explosion, which could have been prevented.

Imperial still faces civil lawsuits.

The company was purchased in 2012 by Switzerland-based agribusiness giant Louis Drewfus Commodities.

Again this year, a bill has been introduced in Congress to require OSHA to issue an interim standard within a year based on the voluntary combustible dust standard set by the National Fire Protection Association.

OSHA issued a rule in 1987 on the handling of grain dust. The rule has been credited with reducing deaths and injuries without imposing a devastating economic burden on the grain industry.

The post No criminal charges in Imperial Sugar explosion that killed 14 workers appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The CSB investigation also says the company deferred crucial maintenance of the large electric arc furnace that blew up.

“This accident is literally a case study into the tragic, predictable consequences of running equipment to failure even when repeated safety incidents over many years warn of impending failure,” said CSB chairperson Rafael Moure-Eraso. “When control room windows blew out during previous furnace incidents, the company merely reinforced them rather than …  investigating why the smaller furnace overpressure events were happening in the first place.”

The CSB called this incident an example of “normalization of deviance,” in which abnormal events become acceptable in everyday operations. Investigators found furnace incidents were so common that workers took them as normal.

The report said hot liquid from the furnace eroded its cover, eventually melting holes in it. Instead of replacing the furnace cover, CI directed workers to attempt repairs. The company issued 26 work orders to repair the cover in the five months before the explosion. CI continued operating the furnace even though it planned to replace the cover in May 2011 — two months after the explosion occurred.

The particular problems experience by CI’s furnace weren’t unique. The CSB report says industry literature described similar situations as early as 1965.

The CSB lead investigator said something else that would have prevented this incident and the deaths was the application of elements of a process safety management program, such as hazard analysis, incident investigation and mechanical integrity.

In a statement, Carbide said it has addressed all the recommendations made by the CSB and additional safeguards and policies have been implemented.

The post Failure to investigate previous explosions led to worker deaths appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The citations are categorized as 11 willful, 12 serious and 2 general.

The willful violations include failure to:

• replace corroded pipe that eventually ruptured
• test pipe thickness in areas identified as susceptible to corrosion and leaks
• implement Chevron’s own emergency procedures to shut down the crude unit where the leak occurred which exposed workers to harm by directing them to remove insulation
• recognize the potential for a catastrophic release of ignitable diesel fuel from the leaking pipe (Chevron ordered contract employees to erect a scaffold at the leak site)
• prevent workers from entering the hazardous incident zone without proper personal protective equipment, and
• replace clamps that had been used as temporary fixes in pipes.

The serious violations include failure to:

• prevent harmful exposures to employees — there were no effective controls for workers in the vicinity of a petroleum hydrocarbon leak
• perform process safety analysis
• provide proper breathing apparatus to emergency responder, and
• provide covers on electrical conduit bodies installed in hazardous locations.

Chevron says it plans to appeal some of the citations. The company says it also doesn’t agree with the categorization of some of the violations as willful.

The fire resulted in one minor worker injury, but about 200 local residents sought medical help for respiratory problems.

In preliminary findings into the causes of the Chevron refinery fire, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) said there was no evidence the company conducted an inspection last year on the section of pipe that ruptured, leading to the fire. The pipe had only 20% of its original thickness. Chevron’s own standards call for replacement of the pipe when it reaches 50% of original thickness.

The CBS probe continues to determine what caused company officials to violate their own standards.

The post Cal/OSHA issues nearly $1M fine for Chevron refinery fire appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The fire on Nov. 24 at Tazreen Fashions Ltd.’s plant in Savar, Bangladesh, trapped 100 workers inside the building where they died. Another 12 people died at hospitals after jumping from the building. About 100 more workers were injured and treated at hospitals.

Accounts of what happened, as reported by various news agencies, include the following:

• When the fire alarm first went off, workers were told by their supervisors to go back to work — the alarm was just malfunctioning
• An exit door was locked from the outside, and
• Fire extinguishers didn’t work.

Workers jumped from several floors of the eight-story building when they realized they were trapped.

Workers at the factory made T-shirts and polo shirts. The company either was or is currently a supplier to Wal-Mart.

It’s been a bad period for garment worker fatalities in Bangladesh. More than 700 people have died in garment-factory fires there since 2006. This most recent fire was the worst.

And now workers are demanding better safety at these plants.

Another garment-factory fire with 146 deaths

On March 25, 1911, 146 workers died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Co. fire in New York City. It’s been called a key trigger event that fundamentally changed U.S. workplace safety conditions.

There are several similarities between the recent Bangladesh fire and the Triangle blaze a century ago:

• More than 100 workers perished inside the Triangle building because they were trapped
• About 40 others died from injuries sustained after jumping from windows
• Exit doors were locked
• There was a lack of fire suppression equipment: only 27 water buckets, and
• Public outrage exploded after the Triangle deaths: The International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union organized a funeral march attended by 100,000.

At the time, New York state lawmakers took notice. They passed 36 bills in the next four years to improve workers’ safety and health.

Other states followed New York’s lead. However, it would be another 60 years until federal OSHA was created.

Then vs. now

So it might be easy to come to the conclusion that workplace safety has come a long way in the U.S. while in other countries they are as much as a century behind.

It’s not an unreasonable conclusion. However, consider this story in determining how far we’ve come in the U.S.:

Last year, OSHA fined Mermaid Meat Co., dba Fine Fare Supermarkets, for various safety violations.

The chain had all five of its exit doors at its Brooklyn, NY, location locked at night. Employees couldn’t unlock the door without a manager’s permission.

OSHA issued more than $60,000 in fines to Mermaid, including one willful violation of $49,000 for the locked exits. In a settlement with OSHA, the company has agreed to pay $35,000.

“One hundred years ago in New York City, 146 workers died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire,” said David Michaels, head of OSHA. “Many of them died because they were locked in and unable to escape swiftly. A century later, we still find employers locking in their employees.”

What does this say about the state of workplace safety in the U.S. today? Let us know what you think in the comments below.

The post Are other countries 100 years behind the U.S. in workplace safety? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

On May 20, 2012, Nancy Harris was working alone at the Whip-In convenience store in Garland, Texas.

A robber entered the store, cleaned out the cash register and then set Harris on fire.

After the robber fled, Harris stumbled out of the store, still on fire. Police happened to be passing by. Officers were able to put out the flames with a fire extinguisher, and Harris was able to give them a description of the robber before she was taken to a hospital.

She suffered burns over 40% of her body. Harris clung to life for nearly a week before succumbing to her injuries.

Police arrested Matthew Lee Johnson and charged him with capital murder.

Workplace not free of recognized hazards

OSHA conducted investigations at four convenience stores owned by TMT, Inc., in the Dallas area, including the one in Garland.

Each store was cited with violating OSHA’s general duty clause for failing to provide a workplace free from recognized hazards likely to cause serious injury or death, in this case, workplace violence. The four serious citations total $19,600.

“Handling money, working alone and standing behind open counters leave employees vulnerable to violent crimes,” said Stephen Boyd, OSHA’s area director in Dallas. “If the employer had conducted an analysis to identify risk for violence, implemented appropriate control measures and provided training to ensure awareness of potential violence, it is possible that this tragic loss of life could have been avoided.”

TMT has 15 work days to decide whether to contest the fines.

OSHA defines workplace violence as any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation or other threatening and disruptive behavior that occurs at a work site.

The post OSHA cites store chain in connection with violent death of clerk appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Navajo Refining agrees to pay $400,000 but admits no wrongdoing (see PDF). The fine is the largest ever issued by New Mexico OSHA.

On March 2, 2010, a storage tank exploded at Navajo’s plant in Artesia, NM.

Employees of Northwest Insulation of Texas were welding on top of the tank. A welder ignited vapors from flammable liquids inside the tank.

The explosion ripped off the tank’s top.

All the workers killed or injured worked for Northwest. The Texas company was also fined by New Mexico OSHA, but it settled its case with the state in 2011. Both companies have provided documentation of actions taken to correct all violations. The refinery is subject to a follow-up inspection to verify that it has done so.

New Mexico originally fined Navajo $707,000 for 10 willful and 1 serious violations. The violations included:

• failure to train employees to recognize explosive hazards
• failure to maintain fire prevention prevention program
• allowing workers to conduct welding in the presence of flammable vapors.

The $400,000 settlement is a 43% reduction of the original fine.

The post Company agrees to $400K settlement in double worker fatality appeared first on Safety News Alert.

1. Preventive maintenance is important, and 2. once you set your company safety standards, make sure you live by them.

The CSB says there’s no evidence Chevron conducted an inspection last year on the section of pipe that ruptured, leading to the fire.

The pipe had only 20% of its original wall thickness. The oil company’s own standards call for replacement of the pipe when it reaches 50% of original thickness.

Chevron inspected other pipe segments in November 2011. The company intended to replace the line that failed, but Chevron officials changed their minds, concluding the pipe had life remaining.

The CSB probe will try to determine what prompted company officials to violate their own safety rules.

A 52-inch long segment of pipe failed on Aug. 6. A fire ignited more than two hours after Chevron employees detected a slow leak in the line. The company cut refinery production slightly as it looked into the leak.

Just before the pipe gave way, a small flash fire erupted. After the rupture, a white cloud rose more than 1,000 feet into the air.

The leak got worse and the fire ignited, turning the white cloud black.

About 20 employees who were near the pipe got out just before they would have suffered potentially fatal injuries. More than 15,000 residents sought treatment at local hospitals for respiratory problems.

The CSB investigation is likely to take several more months to complete. While its investigations aren’t limited to oil production facilities, due to several incidents over the last few years, the oil industry has been a key focus for the agency.

The CSB is an independent federal agency charged with investigating industrial chemical accidents. It has no regulatory power, but it makes recommendations on how to prevent incidents.

The post Lack of pipe inspection contributed to Chevron refinery fire appeared first on Safety News Alert.

M3 Transport/SLT Expressway must pay the former employee $280,000 in back wages and interest, $15,000 in compensatory damages and $20,000 in punitive damages.

The driver refused to drive a truck containing explosives with a co-driver who smoked in the vehicle, a violation of Department of Transportation regulations.

A complaint the driver filed alleged that on Feb. 8, 2010, he was informed a new co-driver had been assigned to haul a vehicle full of explosives to Canada. The driver found an ashtray overflowing with cigarette butts in the new co-driver’s truck and notified his supervisors that he wouldn’t drive with this co-worker because smoking while hauling explosives violates federal regulations.

The driver who complained was told to go home and wait to be assigned a new co-driver, but he was terminated two days later.

OSHA has also ordered the company to:

• expunge any adverse references relating to the termination from the driver’s personnel records, and
• post a notice for all employees notifying them of their rights to raise safety problems under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA).

M3 specializes in transporting explosives for military and defense contractors. The company has 30 from receiving OSHA’s decision to contest the order.

OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of the STAA and 21 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of federal regulations, including safety rules.

Companies are prohibited by law from retaliating against employees who raise various concerns to the employer or to the government. Employees who believe they are victims of such retaliation can file complaints with OSHA’s parent agency, the Department of Labor.

Recently, OSHA has issued several decisions against companies who fired employees in retaliation for reporting safety problems at work.

The post Fired for saying co-driver shouldn’t smoke in vehicle carrying explosives appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The explosion at the Bartlett Grain Co. facility in Atchison, KS, killed six men ages 20 to 43.

Two of the men killed were inspectors who were not employees of Bartlett. Their families have also obtained attorneys, but their cases will be handled separately.

Bartlett’s president, Bob Knief, is just one of several of the grain company’s employees named in the lawsuit.

The allegations in the lawsuit are similar to citations issued by OSHA in April against Bartlett. OSHA issued five willful and eight serious violations for a total of $406,000 in fines. The company is contesting the fines.

The lawsuit accuses Bartlett of willfully ignoring safety rules before the explosion.

In the wrongful death lawsuit, the families of the four victims allege:

• workers weren’t properly trained to get rid of the combustible dust that led to the explosion, and
• dust cleaning practices and electrical connections at the plant were unsafe and inadequate.

The explosion also seriously injured two other employees. It blew a two- to three-story structure called a head house off the top of a 125-foot grain elevator. Residents reported feeling and hearing the explosion four miles away. People in Missouri saw the fireball.

While there has been no criminal prosecution of the company or its executives, an OSHA spokesman said in April when there are fatalities along with willful violations, the agency’s solicitor may consider forwarding the case to the Justice Department for further action.

Family opposes memorial

Just weeks ago, Bartlett announced plans to create a memorial in Atchison for the six men who died in the blast. The plan has drawn strong criticism from one victim’s family.

“It would be our recommendation that Bartlett invest in an extensive safety program designed to prevent another tragedy,” wrote Zoe and Kevin Bock, the mother and stepfather of Chad Roberts, 20, the youngest worker to die in the explosion.

Do you think it would be better for Bartlett to dedicate additional spending in its safety program to the memories of the workers who died rather than to build a memorial? Let us know what you think in the comments below.

The post 4 families sue grain company in explosion death of employees appeared first on Safety News Alert.

According to an investigation by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) published by McClatchy newspapers, on June 1, 2007, Tina Hall received third-degree burns over 90% of her body due to a flash fire at Toyo Automotive Parts in Franklin, KY. The fire was caused by a spark, probably from static electricity, that ignited solvent.

Kentucky’s Workplace Standards cited Toyo for 16 serious violations, including:

• obstructed exit routes
• not keeping flammable liquids in covered containers when they weren’t being used, and
• failing to control vapors and having inadequate fire-protection equipment.

Fines totaled $105,500.

Workplace Standards dismissed all the citations the following year, saying it had determined the case wouldn’t withstand a challenge by Toyo.

But now the citations are reinstated. Why?

Kentucky dropped the citations after Toyo agreed to correct safety problems and submit to follow-up inspections.

Earlier this year, an inspector returned to the Toyo plant and found not all the problems were corrected.

In what’s thought to be an unprecedented move, Kentucky reinstated all the citations against the company, including the $105,500 fine.

Problem with state programs?

The CPI investigation used the case involving Hall and Toyo to illustrate problems with state-run OSHA programs.

After hearing about the Hall case, Ron Hayes with the F.I.G.H.T. (Families in Grief Hold Together) Project, which helps family members of employees killed at work, filed a complaint about Kentucky Workplace Standards with federal OSHA.

Following an investigation, federal OSHA called the Hall case a “travesty of justice.”

“The violations were well documented and legally sufficient and there was no definitive evidence in the file that indicated that they could not be supported,” said federal OSHA Regional Administrator Cindy Coe.

Following federal investigations into problems at occupational safety agencies in Nevada and Hawaii, the U.S. Department of Labor is developing a new monitoring system for state OSHAs.

What do you think about the Hall-Toyo case? Let us know in the comments below.

The post State dismisses then reinstates OSHA violations in connection to fatality appeared first on Safety News Alert.

In interim findings, U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) investigators say BP and its partner Transocean focused on personal injury data (such as dropped objects, slips, trips and falls, etc.). That focus overshadowed measuring indicators that could point to more catastrophic incidents.

“A number of past CSB investigations have found companies focusing on personal injury rates while virtually overlooking looming process safety issues,” said CSB Chair Dr. Rafael Moure-Eraso. “Furthermore, we have found failures by companies to implement their own recommendations from previous accidents.”

One company that failed to do that was BP.

In its investigation of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, a CSB investigator found an “eerie resemblance” between the 2005 explosion at the BP Texas City refinery that killed 15 workers and the Gulf of Mexico explosion five years later.

At the Texas City refinery in 2005, contract workers had just returned to temporary trailers at the plant after attending a celebratory lunch commending an excellent personal injury record. Shortly after the lunch, the explosion occurred.

On the day of the explosion at Deepwater Horizon in 2010, BP and Transocean officials praised workers for a low rate of personal injuries.

A CSB investigator said companies need to develop indicators that give them information about their potential for catastrophic incidents.

“Safety is not easy to measure,” and that has to be done using “surrogate indicators,” said a companion report by an industry expert released by the CSB.

What are those measures, also known as leading indicators?

Another expert opinion paper released by the CSB provides some suggestions:

• backlogs of maintenance which is critical to the safety of the facility
• temporary repairs
• levels of deferred maintenance
• number of safety instrument overrides
• equipment wear (such as corrosion), and
• percent of time maintenance isn’t completed on time.

Do you think the safety field has focused too much and too long on lagging indicators like injury rates? Have you shifted to attempts to measure leading indicators that show potential for larger, possibly catastrophic incidents? Let us know in the comments below.

The post Investigators say BP was sweating the small stuff appeared first on Safety News Alert.

A federal jury awarded John Jentz a total of $75.5 million. Jentz suffered burns over 75% of his body. He’s undergone numerous surgeries and skin grafts for disabling injuries.

Worker Justin Becker received $66.9 million; employee Robert Schmidt was awarded $36.2 million.

The awards include $101 million in punitive damages that were split evenly among the three men.

The three men were working in a ConAgra grain silo in Chester, IL, on April 27, 2010, when the structure exploded.

A chemical reaction had ignited grain pellets inside the silo at least six weeks before the explosion. The silo had been emitting a strange smell and smoke.

Despite the warning signs and complaints from employees, managers didn’t call firefighters and didn’t warm the three contractors before sending them into the silo to remove equipment.

Following a one month trial, the jury deliberated for 10 hours before returning its verdict.

ConAgra issued a statement which said, “We do not agree with the verdict or damages. Specifically we do not believe our actions caused the injuries, and we will appeal this outcome.”

The company said it does have insurance policies it believes would cover the full amount of the judgment.

Attorneys for the three men presented evidence that the silo hadn’t been properly cleaned in 20 years and precautions weren’t taken to protect workers.

Marc Taxman, an attorney for one of the workers, said the companies should have removed the pellets from the silo immediately after it became apparent they had ignited. Taxman said ConAgra delayed while trying to get a better price for the grain. They also refused to use water on the grain to avoid destroying it, he said.

The post Jury awards $179M to three workers burned in grain explosion appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Bartlett Grain Co. faces $406,000 in fines for the October 2011 grain elevator explosion in Atchison, KS. A contractor employed by Bartlett, Kansas Grain Inspection Services based in Topeka, was fined $67,500.

OSHA issued five willful and eight serious violations to Bartlett, including:

• allowing grain dust to accumulate (willful)
• using compressed air to remove dust without first shutting down ignition sources (willful)
• using electrical equipment inappropriate for the working environment (willful)
• lack of proper preventive maintenance (serious)
• inadequate emergency action plan training for employees and contractors (serious)
• lack of employee and contractor training on job hazards (serious), and
• a housekeeping program that was deficient because it did not prevent grain dust accumulations (serious).

Kansas Grain Inspection Services was hit with three citations, including one willful violation involving a lack of fall protection for employees and one serious violation for the lack of a hazard communication program.

The Washington Post reports an OSHA spokesman says when there is a fatality along with a willful violation, the agency’s solicitor may consider forwarding the case to the Justice Department for criminal consideration, although no decision has been made at this time.

A written statement from Bartlett Grain’s president, Bob Knief, says the company will contest the citations. The company disagrees there was a hazardous accumulation of dust before the explosion and contends the dust found by OSHA was deposited by the incident.

Kansas Grain Inspection Services also plans to appeal the citations.

OSHA says over the past 35 years, there have been more than 500 explosions in grain handling facilities in the U.S. that have killed more than 180 people and injured more than 675.

The post Company hit with $406K fine in fatal grain explosion appeared first on Safety News Alert.

On Aug. 9, 2011, the explosion in Sylmar, CA, ripped the roof off and leveled most of a building. Two people lost limbs in the blast: One of them was the brother of the man killed in a previous explosion.

The three companies, Rainbow of Hope, Realm Catalyst and Strategic Sciences develop alternative fuels.

Cal/OSHA says the Aug. 9 incident occurred when a pressure vessel containing compressed gas, including hydrogen and oxygen, exploded while the two workers were transferring the gas from one cylinder to another. Both men also suffered serious burns. A third worker was treated for minor injuries.

Of the 28 citations, 6 were willful and 18 were serious. Cal/OSHA says the companies failed to correct hazardous conditions that had been identified in two previous explosions. The companies failed to ensure ignition sources were eliminated from the work area. There was no written plan for the use of flammable gases. Workers continued to go unprotected, according to the agency.

Cal/OSHA is also conducting a criminal investigation in the case. The results of that investigation will be turned over to prosecutors.

The post Cal/OSHA fines companies $540K for explosion; 2 workers lost limbs appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The blast at the Bartlett Grain Co. facility blew a two- to three-story structure called a head house off the top of the 125-foot grain elevator. Area residents reported feeling and hearing the explosion up to four miles away. People in Missouri saw the fireball.

Those killed ranged in ages from 20 to 43.

Two more workers were seriously injured and were flown to the University of Kansas Hospital’s burn unit. Four more employees who were at the facility escaped unharmed or with minor injuries.

Atchison city officials released a statement noting that dust from milled grain can be explosive under certain conditions, especially during dry weather.

OSHA’s Grain Handling Facilities Standard took effect in 1987. By 2003, the number of explosions dropped by 42% and explosion-related fatalities fell by 70%.

The post 6 workers dead following grain elevator explosion appeared first on Safety News Alert.

OSHA has fined All-Feed Processing & Packaging, Inc., $758,450 following an inspection at its Galva, IL, pet food production and packaging facility.

All-Feed now faces the following citations:

• nine per-instance willful citations for failing to mandate the use of respirators for six workers exposed to dust in excess of the permissible exposure limits; and failing to protect three dust collection units, which collect combustible dust such as starch, potato base, cellulose fiber and pea protein, from fire and explosion hazards
• four single-instance willful citations for requiring employees to work in areas where they were exposed to total dust in excess of permissible limits, and failing to implement adequate engineering controls when employees were exposed; failing to administer a continuing and effective hearing conservation program for employees exposed to excessive noise; failing to ensure the safe use, wiring and installation of equipment in hazardous locations; and allowing the use of liquid propane-powered industrial trucks in atmospheres where combustible dust may be ignited; the fines for the 13 willful violations total $700,700
• three repeat safety violations for failing to ensure that operators of powered industrial trucks had completed training and were evaluated on their skills, have the load rating affixed to lifting devices and post danger signs to warn exposed employees of potential dangers posed by work spaces involving hazardous conditions; one repeat health violation for failing to post safety instruction signs indicating the presence of combustible dust; the company was cited for similar hazards in 2009; the fines for the four repeat violations total $50,050
• one serious safety violation, with a proposed fine of $3,850, for failing to have written certification that all hazards in the permit-required confined space had been eliminated, and
• five other-than-serious violations, with proposed fines of $3,850, for failing to record work-related injuries and illness as required on the OSHA 300 log.

The post Failed to protect workers from dust and noise: $758K fine appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has placed a hold on the bill, which makes it more difficult for the Senate to consider it.

The measure would authorize more federal safety inspectors, and pipeline companies would have to confirm that their records on how much pressure their pipelines can tolerate are accurate.

The pressure issue is key. The National Transportation Safety Board just released the results of its investigation into the Sept. 9, 2010, gas pipeline explosion that killed eight people, injured dozens more, and destroyed or damaged more than 100 homes in San Bruno, CA.

The report says Pacific Gas & Electric Co. records incorrectly described the section of pipe that ruptured as being seamless rather than welded. That led the company to place a maximum gas pressure limit on the line that was too high for it to withstand.

Paul’s action comes despite sound support for the bill among industry and in his home state.

The bill has support from major trade associations, including the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, the American Gas Association and the Association of Oil Pipelines. The Pipeline Safety Trust also supports it.

The president of Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline of Owensboro, KY, has also voiced his support for the bill and spoke to Paul about it.

Industry actually wants Congress to pass the bill. Why? If it doesn’t, regulators within the Obama administration will be free to create new pipeline safety regulations as they want to.

And up to this point, it looked like Congress was on a path to approve the measure. Similar bills were approved by committees in the Senate and House without a single no vote.

Paul is considered a key leader in the Tea Party movement that supports less federal regulation for businesses. Despite his hold on the bill, so far he hasn’t been willing to discuss the situation with the media.

Do you think there should be an absolute freeze on all new safety regulations because of the struggling economy? What do you think about Paul’s position on this matter? Let us know in the comments below.

The post Are all new safety regulations bad? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Mermaid Meat Co., doing business as Fine Fare Supermarkets, had all five of its exit doors of its Brooklyn, NY, store locked at night. Employees couldn’t unlock the door without a manager’s permission.

“One hundred years ago in New York City, 146 workers died in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire,” said David Michaels, the head of OSHA. “Many of them died because they were locked in and unable to escape swiftly. A century later, we still find employers locking in their employees.”

OSHA standards require employees be able to open an exit door from the inside at all times, without keys, tools or special knowledge. A device such as a panic bar that locks only from the outside is permitted on exit doors.

Mermaid faces a total of $62,300 in fines: one willful violation of $49,000 for the locked exits, and four serious violations totaling $13,300 for obstructed exit routes as well as electrical and tripping hazards.

The supermarket has 15 business days from receipt of its citations to contest the fines.

The post OSHA fines store for locking in employees appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The report from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) says the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig that killed 11 workers and sent almost five million barrels of oil into the Gulf over 87 days starting April 20, 2010, was the result of  ”poor risk management, last-minute changes to plans, failure to observe and respond to critical indicators, inadequate well control response, and insufficient emergency bridge response training by the companies responsible.”

The technical reasons for the explosion include problems with cement barriers, production casing and lock-down sleeves.

But the report also finds seven company practices that contributed to the explosion. They read like a list of things not to do if you want to have a safe company:

• the failure of the crew to stop work after encountering multiple hazards and warnings, despite the existence of a stop-work policy
• BP’s failure to fully assess the risks associated with a number of operational decisions leading up to the blowout
• BP’s cost- or time-saving decisions without considering contingencies and mitigation
• BP’s failure to ensure all risks associated with operations on the Deepwater Horizon were as low as reasonably practicable
• BP’s failure to have full supervision and accountability over the activities associated with the Deepwater Horizon
• BP’s failure to document, evaluate, approve and communicate changes associated with Deepwater Horizon personnel and operations, and
• failure of BP and Transocean to ensure they had a common integrated approach to well control.

Specifically, the BOEMRE report says in the days leading up to April 20, 2010, BP made a series of decisions that added incremental risk and failed to communicate these decisions to its business partner, Transocean. As a result, employees for both companies didn’t fully identify and evaluate the risks involved and misinterpreted anomalies they encountered.

Among the problems that BP and Transocean faced: project completion delays and cost overruns. At the time of the explosion, the project was significantly behind schedule. Operations were more than $58 million over budget.

Resulting cost cuts were a major contributor to the disaster, according to the BOEMRE report.

BP rewarded employees for cost-saving steps but didn’t reward them in the same way for increasing safety.

The U.S. Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation that could bring indictments and heavy fines. An expert interviewed by The New York Times says the BOEMRE report increases the likelihood that criminal charges will be filed.

As someone in charge of safety, have you ever faced pressure to cut costs or make changes that would increase risk so a project could be completed on time? How did you handle the situation? Let us know in the comments.

The post 7 company practices that contributed to BP disaster appeared first on Safety News Alert.

OSHA says on the day of the explosion, a valve on a transfer line for acetone was left open, resulting in the release of flammable vapors. The vapors exploded after being ignited by an undetermined source.

Bostik knew from third party and internal audits that aspects of its process safety management (PSM) program were incomplete or inadequate, according to OSHA.

Fortunately, not many workers were in the plant at the time of the explosion. The four workers who were injured are back at work at the plant.

OSHA issued nine willful citations, with $630,000 in proposed fines, for serious deficiencies in Bostik’s PSM program, including:

• analysis of hazards related to a chemical process didn’t address previous incidents with a potential for catastrophic results, such as forklifts that struck equipment
• lack of attention to human factors such as operator error, communication between shift changes and employee fatigue from excessive overtime
• failure to ensure that a forklift and electrical equipment, such as a light fixture, switches and a motor, were approved for use in Class I hazardous locations where flammable gases are present.

Bostik has also been issued 41 serious citations, with $287,000 in fines, for a range of other conditions including an incomplete emergency response plan, inadequate training for employees required to fight fires and obstructed exits.

Bostik says it’s upgraded its Middleton plant since the explosion and it’s reviewing OSHA’s findings. The company has 15 days to decide whether to appeal the fines.

The post OSHA fines company $917K for explosion that injured 4 workers appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Brandon Wright was riding his motorcycle on U.S. Highway 89 in Logan, UT, on Sept. 12, when a car pulled out of a parking lot in front of him.

Wright intentionally grounded his bike to avoid getting hit, but it went up in flames and he slid underneath the car, which was also on fire.

A worker from a nearby construction site tried by himself to lift the car. Then he was joined by four others, and finally, about a dozen people managed to lift the two-ton car while a construction worker pulled Wright out from underneath the vehicle.

Wright is hospitalized in critical but stable condition.

One rescuer who talked to a local TV station said the situation was “kind of dangerous,” and he thought the car was close to exploding before nearby workers doused the flames with two fire extinguishers.

The rescuers “did a great job,” according to Logan’s assistant police chief, Jeff Curtis. “I’m impressed they would risk their own safety to lift the car up and get the individual out from underneath it.”

An MSNBC article stated, “In comic books, superheroes are often depicted as lone wolves, but in a horrifying car-motorcycle crash in Logan, Utah on Monday, heroes came in bunches.”

Today show anchor Matt Lauer said, “We use the word hero too often; not in this particular case.”

Exclamations from anchors on at least two other national morning news shows were similar in their high praise for the citizen rescuers.

We’d all do the same thing, but …

While thinking about this story, I recalled a memory from my childhood.

My parents would often take me swimming at a lake while I was growing up. There was a dock with a diving board, but sometimes no lifeguard.

One day, my mom took me swimming in the lake, and other kids were there, too. One of them looked at my mother and asked her, “Are you the lifeguard?”

She replied, “No, but if you got in trouble, I’d try to save you.”

In fact, my mom had taken lifeguard courses in college. However, this was a couple of decades after that.

Whether or not she’d taken those lifeguard courses, since she was an adult and knew how to swim, her answer to the question would probably have been the same. It’s human nature to want to help someone in trouble.

As the assistant police chief noted, the rescuers of the man trapped under the burning vehicles “did a great job,” but they also “risk[ed] their own safety.” The police are trying to identify the rescuers so they can be acknowledged. So we haven’t heard the last about this story. There will be more coverage when the rescuers are identified.

Time and time again, we hear about situations in which workers jump in to save a co-worker who needs rescue, but the results are tragic: The rescuers themselves die.

What do you think about this type of news coverage of rescues performed by untrained citizens? Would you use this story of the rider saved from the burning vehicles as a teachable moment in a safety meeting for workers? Let us know what you think in the comments.

The post Are news outlets wrong to elevate rescuers to hero status? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The answer to that question may depend on whether you’re a “glass-half-full” or “glass-half-empty” person.

The Charlotte Observer suggests, “20 years after Hamlet, N.C.’s worker safety push weakens.”

On Sept. 3, 1991, a ruptured hydraulic line sprayed flammable liquid onto a deep fat fryer at the Imperial Food Products plant in Hamlet, NC, setting off a fire and filling the plant with smoke.

Workers who were there say balls of fire shot across the plant floor. Employees ran to doors that were locked to prevent theft of chicken nuggets produced for fast-food restaurants. Twenty-five died, and if one worker hadn’t been able to break down one locked door, another 25 would have perished. That detail is eerily similar to the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire 80 years earlier in New York City that spurred action by New York state officials to address workplace safety.

The same thing happened in North Carolina after the Imperial fire. Federal officials slammed North Carolina OSHA after the 25 fatalities. The plant had never been inspected in 11 years of operation.

In the following two years, the state more than doubled its number of safety inspectors, bringing the total to 115. North Carolina OSHA became one of the nation’s largest such safety agencies.

Stagnation follows?

But the number of inspectors never increased after 1993. Today the number stands at 114, despite 19% growth in the state’s workforce during the period.

On the other hand, today, North Carolina continues to have more OSHA inspectors than all but a few states. Georgia, a state with a slightly larger population, has less than a third as many inspectors.

Some other statistics compiled by the Observer show a mixed bag:

• Total citations dropped to 10,400 last fiscal year, the lowest number in 17 years.
• Inspections are at their lowest level since 2001.
• North Carolina’s injury and illness rates are at an all-time low and are below those in most other states.
• After reaching a low in 2009, workplace deaths climbed more than 40% last year — 48 deaths in 2010 compared to 34 in 2009.
• Fewer than one of every 1,000 OSHA violations were deemed willful in the last decade.
• Financial penalties rose to $5.9 million, the highest in years.
• But North Carolina imposes smaller fines than most other states.

North Carolina Labor Commissioner Cherie Berry (R), an elected official, told the Observer she sees no evidence that high fines make job sites safe. Berry is also expecting a cut in federal funds that help pay for the state’s OSHA inspectors.

So here’s the question: Looking at North Carolina’s occupational safety story over the last 20 years, is it a success, a failure, or somewhere in between? Let us know what you think in the comments.

The post 20 years after 25 deaths: How is state’s safety plan doing? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, also known as the First Responders Bill, went into effect in July. It makes $1.5 billion in federal and New York City funds available to cover all costs for treating certain 9/11-related illnesses, and $2.7 billion in compensation for victims who suffered economic hardship due to the attacks. The Zadroga Fund was years in the making.

Illnesses eligible for coverage include:

• asthma
• lung disease
• chronic cough syndrome
• laryngitis
• sleep apnea
• sinusitis
• digestive disorders
• depression
• post traumatic stress disorder, and
• substance abuse.

But cancers aren’t covered. The Centers for Disease Control, which is administering the fund, say there isn’t enough scientific evidence linking cancer in first responders to their exposure to toxic substances from the 9/11 attacks.

However, a new study in The Lancet medical journal supports a link between cancer and exposure to substances at the former site of the WTC.

The study tracked almost 10,000 firefighters and found that those exposed to substances at Ground Zero are 19% more likely to develop cancer than firefighters who were not exposed.

Ralph Geidel was retired from the New York City Fire Department, but returned to Ground Zero after the attacks to help search for his brother who was in the WTC at the time of the attacks.

Geidel has spent almost $100,000 on his medical treatment since 2003 when he was diagnosed with tongue and neck cancer.

The type of cancer Geidel has is normally seen in people ages 60-70. He was 44 when he was diagnosed, and he is neither a heavy drinker or smoker.

On the other hand, Chris Doran, a first responder and former New York City police officer has been helped by the Zadroga Act.

Doran suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and a sinus condition so severe that he’s had five operations for it.

He was paying $7,000 a year for medications and had to file for bankruptcy. Now all of Doran’s medical costs will be paid for by the government.

9/11 first responders like Geidel hope the First Responders Bill is amended so cancer treatment will also be paid for.

Other help is available for 9/11 first responders. The FealGood Foundation, a non-profit organization, spreads awareness and educates the public about the catastrophic health effects on 9/11 first responders, and also provides assistance to relieve these great heroes of the financial burdens placed on them over the last ten years.

As the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks arrives, let’s take a moment to remember the first responders, some of whom died, and others who are living with lasting effects to this day from their experiences.

Feel free to leave any thoughts in the comments below as we mark the 9/11 anniversary.

The post Some 9/11 first responders get help, some don’t appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Black Mag and the company’s owner, Craig Sanborn have surrendered the company’s explosives manufacturing license and will permanently refrain from employing workers in any explosives-related business.

On May 14, 2010, an explosion at the company’s Colebrook, NH, facility killed two employees while they were manufacturing a gunpowder substitute.

OSHA issued 54 citations (4 egregious, 12 willful, 36 serious, 2 other-than-serious) with total penalties of $1,232,500.

The four egregious citations were for failure to train each of the four workers involved in manufacture of the gun powder substitute.

Black Mag has certified that it has terminated all production, which occurred when the explosion destroyed the facility and put it out of business.

As part of the settlement, the company will enter an enforcement order with a federal court. Violation of such an order could lead to charges of contempt of court in which potential penalties could include prison time.

Do you agree with the way OSHA resolved this case? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.

The post Business closes to settle $1.2M OSHA fine appeared first on Safety News Alert.

One year after an attempted car bombing in Times Square, OSHA sent a letter to 63 theaters in Manhattan warning them that future inspections will include reviews of emergency-action plans, including evacuation methods, according to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

Investigators traced the failed bomb to Faisal Shahzad of Connecticut, a naturalized U.S. citizen with ties to the Pakistani Taliban.

A street vendor spotted smoke coming from an SUV parked outside the Minskoff Theatre where The Lion King is performed.

Police quickly cleared the area and shut down Times Square for 10 hours.

The bomb misfired because it was made poorly. However, if it had been made properly, it would have created a fireball capable of shredding cars and killing people in hundreds of feet in all directions.

The WSJ says the letter from OSHA came in response to a December report on emergency preparedness in New York City’s theater district by the New York state Assembly subcommittee on workplace safety.

The report was issued following a roundtable to discuss concerns among theater employees that existing emergency evacuation plans needed “careful reexamination.”

It recommended OSHA “issue clearer guidance on which theaters are required to establish Emergency Action Plans.”

The post Where has OSHA focused on terrorism in New York City? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

American Electric Power (AEP) agreed to the settlement just as jury selection had started in the case.

On March 4, 2006, Gerald Talbert was working in a cage inside of the stack when the fire broke out. Rescuers didn’t find his body until two days later.

Three other workers were stuck atop the stack at AEP’s Kammer-Mitchell power plant in Marshall County, WV, until a helicopter flew in to rescue them. Talbert’s widow and two of the other workers filed the lawsuit. Most of the money will go to Talbert’s family.

The lawsuit accused the company of negligence and claimed it knew working conditions inside the stack were dangerous.

The suit claimed Talbert died because of a defective cable on the lift that controlled his work cage.

The lawyer representing widow Tiffani Talbert said AEP representatives apologized to the Talbert family after the settlement.

AEP also said that as a result of Talbert’s death, it has changed the safety rules and culture at the plant.

The post $27M settlement in fire that killed 1 worker, injured 3 others appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Joe Main, asked U.S. senators at a committee hearing to pass legislation that would give his agency new regulatory power.

Main said MSHA has beefed up its inspections since the UBB explosion. It’s conducted 228 impact inspections in which inspectors enter the mine without giving any prior notice.

The MSHA administrator also asked members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee to pass legislation which would make it easier for the agency to immediately shut down a dangerous mine.

MSHA currently has authority to shut down mines with a pattern of violations, but Main says it’s a difficult process that requires going before a judge.

A recent report by the Department of Labor’s assistant inspector general showed in 32 years, MSHA had never successfully used its full authority to clamp down on mines with a history of serious violations.

A full report on the investigation into the UBB explosion is several months away. However, MSHA plans to hold a briefing on the investigation status on June 29 in Beckley, WV.

The post 1 year after death of 29 miners: What’s improved? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a civil lawsuit against BP in December.

Now comes word from Bloomberg news that federal prosecutors are considering whether to pursue manslaughter charges against BP managers for decisions leading to the explosion.

The report says prosecutors have been looking into charges of involuntary manslaughter or seaman’s manslaughter, which carries a more serious penalty of up to 10 years in prison.

At issue: Decisions by BP managers leading up to the explosion that may have sacrificed safety for speed and cost savings.

A presidential commission identified 11 decisions at Deepwater Horizon that saved time and increased risks. Seven of those decisions were made by BP managers on shore.

The investigation is being conducted by a DOJ criminal division task force. The department moved recently to consolidate management of the probe.

Do you think BP and/or its managers should face criminal charges, including involuntary manslaughter, in connection with the deaths of 11 workers due to the Deepwater Horizon explosion? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.

The post Report: Feds considering manslaughter charges for BP appeared first on Safety News Alert.

You’re probably thinking, “Of course they have.” And many things have changed.

But first, before I make my argument that some things haven’t changed, some history.

Workers were mostly immigrants

Some 270 workers were employed at Triangle in 1911. Most of them were recent Jewish and Italian immigrants. On March 25, something caused fabric used to make women’s blouses to catch fire.

The fire spread quickly, trapping many young, recent immigrant women on the ninth floor of the building.

About 40 jumped from windows to their deaths. Blankets were held below to try to catch the women, but they fell right through them. About 100 more burned to death inside the building.

The average age of those killed was 19.

Exit doors were locked because the owners wanted to prevent thefts. Other doors opened from the inside, also making escape impossible. There was just one shaky fire escape. The only fire suppression equipment: 27 water buckets.

Fire companies responded quickly, but they were no match for the blaze. It was all over in about half an hour.

Public outrage over deaths

The International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union organized a funeral march attended by 100,000.

New York state lawmakers took notice. They formed the Factory Investigative Commission. It investigated 3,385 workplaces and reported on fire safety, machine guarding, ventilation and other safety and health topics.

The core recommendation of the commission: that government take action to protect the safety of working people.

Another key finding by the commission: The high proportion of non-English speaking immigrants in some industries compounded workplace safety problems.

The New York legislature passed 36 bills in the next four years to improve workers’ safety and health.

The pace of legislative action slowed five years later when businesses claimed many of the commission’s charges were unfounded, investigators were inexperienced and the reforms were too costly and would force employers to relocate to other states.

Still, the Triangle fire is credited with launching government action that was duplicated in other states and led to The New Deal and the creation of OSHA 60 years later. The American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) also formed just six months after the Triangle fire.

Fast forward to today

Next month, the U.S. will mark the one-year anniversaries of two other workplace disasters: the Upper Big Branch mine explosion that killed 29 miners on April 5, 2010, and the BP Deepwater Horizon explosion that killed 11 workers on April 20, 2010.

When workplace disasters result in the deaths of multiple workers, politicians still take notice and call for new laws to protect workers.

Yet, it may come as a surprise to many Americans that 4,340 workers still die each year on the job in the U.S. That’s about 12 per day. Most of these deaths get no media coverage beyond hometown newspapers and TV stations because they happen one at a time.

Each day in the U.S., more workers die than the number killed in the BP explosion. In three days, more die than died in the Massey mine. In 13 days, the same number of workers die as perished in the Triangle fire.

Yet it still takes those types of disasters to call attention to workplace fatalities — just as it did 100 years ago. Commissions are formed, the public becomes enraged, and politicians notice.

When lawmakers call for new safety regulations, business groups still say claims about workplace safety are unfounded, OSHA investigators aren’t experienced and the costs of new regulations will cause them to lose huge amounts of money and eliminate jobs.

And the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports Hispanic workers die or are injured on the job at a disproportionate rate. For many of these workers, English wasn’t their first language.

Some things to think about, 100 years after the Triangle fire.

What do you think? As the Triangle anniversary is marked, is the U.S. on the right track when it comes to workplace safety, or have we lost our way? You can leave your comments below.

For more about the fire, click here and here.

The post Have attitudes toward workplace safety changed in 100 years? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

Jessie Akers was a manager at a Wal-Mart Tire and Lube Express location in Winchester, TN.

In 2009, a customer returned two defective tires that were purchased at the store. Akers discounted replacement tires to $50 each. The customer thought the new tires would be free and didn’t bring money.

Akers allowed the customer to have the tires with a promise to return with the money. That never happened.

Wal-Mart presented Akers with a restitution note for the unpaid tires. He signed the note and repaid the $100.

Despite that, Wal-Mart fired Akers for allowing a customer to leave with merchandise without paying. Akers claims he was really fired for another reason.

As supervisor of his department, Akers kept a door to the stock room unlocked to provide access to an emergency exit.

Wal-Mart’s local asset protection coordinator told Akers that the door should remain locked even though the public couldn’t access it.

Akers told the asset protection coordinator that the fire marshal or OSHA may need to be contacted because the locked door was a safety hazard to employees.

And that’s what Akers claims was really behind his firing — his threat to call OSHA. He took his case to court, claiming retaliatory discharge. Wal-Mart filed a motion to have the case thrown out.

The court sided with Wal-Mart. Reason: Intention to contact OSHA isn’t the same as actually contacting the agency. For whistleblower protection, Akers would have needed to file a complaint with OSHA or another safety agency. Case dismissed.

(Akers v. Wal-Mart, U.S. Dist. Crt. E.D. TN, No. 4:10-cv-41, 3/3/11)

What’s your opinion on this case? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.

The post Whistleblower protection for worker who threatened to call OSHA? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

When it comes to safety training, is distance learning and e-learning as good as hands-on experience? Depends.

Hands-on safety training for workers in highly hazardous jobs is most effective in improving safe work behavior, according to the paper, The Dread Factor: How Hazards and Safety Training Influence Learning and Performance. Researchers looked at 40 years of studies to come to their conclusions.

The action, conversations and considerable reflection that take place in highly engaging forms of training create a sense of dread about the hazards workers potentially face in their jobs.

However, for less hazardous work, the method of training seems to matter less, according to the researchers. Less interactive training can have the desired effect.

What’s the take-home for safety managers?  Even though they may be encouraged to trim their budgets, safety managers need to carefully consider the relative costs and benefits of using more passive training methods versus more engaging ones.

In the long run, the savings may come in the form of fewer employee injuries, even if the initial costs for hands-on training are more expensive.

To measure the importance of this research, a safety manager needs to look no farther than two disasters in 2010 in highly hazardous industries: the BP oil rig explosion that killed 11 workers and the Upper Big Branch explosion that killed 29 miners.

The report includes this anecdote regarding Upper Big Branch: Safety training for new miners regarding roof control and ventilation plans was conducted using lectures and visual aids. However, self-rescuer and respiratory device training included demonstrations and hands-on training.

MSHA’s inspections of Upper Big Branch show most repeated violations were in roof control and ventilation plans.

A PDF of The Dread Factor can be downloaded here.

Do you use hands-on safety training? Let us know about it in the Comments Box below.

The post Does your safety training have the ‘dread factor’? appeared first on Safety News Alert.

The committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), asked employers and business groups to express their concerns about government regulations that had the potential to limit job creation.

The five OSHA proposals that businesses are most concerned about are:

1. Noise standards

OSHA had proposed to reinterpret part of its noise standard to require employers to use more engineering and administrative solutions to decrease employees’ noise exposure instead of relying solely on hearing protection.

Business groups said the new interpretation would add substantial costs for employers.

Last month, OSHA withdrew its proposal to study alternative approaches.

2. Injury and Illness Prevention Program (I2P2)

The report says business groups view OSHA’s I2P2 proposal as a mandate that will undermine their current safety programs and lead to inconsistent and unpredictable safety violations by OSHA inspectors.

The American Iron and Steel Institute worries that OSHA will use the rule to “double dip” when assessing citations and fines for violations “both covered and not covered by a specific OSHA standard.”

Once again, cost was noted as a factor, as well as the fear that the program would create a “paperwork nightmare” for employers.

3. OSHA Form 300 musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) column

Business groups are concerned that the new reporting requirement would allow OSHA to use its general duty clause to issue violations in lieu of a national ergonomics standard.

OSHA withdrew this proposal last month, saying it would seek more input from small businesses.

4. Consultation agreements

OSHA proposed a rule that would allow compliance officers to conduct an inspection as a result of a voluntary on-site consultation, as well as conduct an enforcement visit even if the company is part of OSHA’s Safety and Health Achievement and Recognition Program (SHARP).

Currently, in both cases, companies would be exempt from an inspection.

Business groups commented that this rule would create a disincentive for businesses to reach out to OSHA for fear they would be subject to inspections and fines.

5. Combustible dust standard

Business groups are concerned that OSHA’s proposed combustible dust standard doesn’t differentiate among various industries.

Employers say it may be better for OSHA to address combustible dust without a “one-size-fits-all” standard.

A PDF of the committee’s report is available here.

Do you think the concerns expressed by the various business groups are valid? How should OSHA address these issues? Let us know in the Comments Box below.

The post 5 OSHA proposals that business groups fear most appeared first on Safety News Alert.

BP said it plans to sell its Texas City refinery where 15 people were killed and more than 170 were injured in a March 2005 explosion.

The plant has been very expensive for BP, including these costs:

• $1.5 billion to settle civil lawsuits related to the explosion
• $50 million in OSHA fines, with another $30 million yet to be negotiated, and
• more than $1 billion in improvements.

The oil company also faces a lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general for illegally releasing contaminants from the plant.

In his business blog for the Houston Chronicle, Loren Steffy opines, “It certainly seems that BP can’t afford to keep operating the refinery, given that it seems unable to operate it safely.

“The new owners will have to recognize that they still need to invest in improving the safety culture at the refinery,” Steffy wrote.

The post Got a safety problem? Sell it to someone else appeared first on Safety News Alert.