CCP Invalidated by DC Circuit
Court of Appeals
In a decision dated April 12, 1999, the
District of Columbia U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals
vacated the Cooperative Compliance Program directive.
OSHA issued the CCP about a year and a half ago as a
new way to impact safety in this country. The idea was
to notify and convince employers with higher lost workday
injury and illness rates to implement a comprehensive
safety and health program and decrease their rates.
OSHA believed that the CCP directive
constituted an inspection plan. The parties opposing
the CCP felt that it was a safety and health standard
which had not gone through the notice and comment procedure
required to issue a standard. The Court concluded that
the CCP imposed more stringent requirements than were
already on the books, the CCP was a standard making
employers implement a safety and health program, and
the Court thereby vacated the directive.
In order to implement the CCP, OSHA is
now required to go through a public notice and comment
period. This course of action does not appear likely.
Instead, it appears that we will continue to use alternate
inspection targeting methods (discussed below). It is
not known whether the court decision will be appealed.
The DC Circuit Court of Appeals decision
on the CCP can be found at:
Inspection Program Ends
During the past year while the CCP was
pending court review, OSHA implemented an alternate
system of inspection targeting called the Interim Targeting
Inspection Program. A few remaining ITIP inspections
may be initiated/completed. To give you an idea of the
problems we have seen on ITIPs, a summary of the hazards
the Aurora office has been finding under this targeting
system has been compiled. This summary is toward the
end of the newsletter.
Site Specific Targeting Program Begins
The successor to the Interim Targeting
Inspection Program took effect 4/19/99. OSHA Directive
Number 99-3 (CPL 2), Site Specific Targeting is now
in effect. OSHA offices already have received new site
inspection lists based on a survey of 1997 injury and
illness data for employers with 50 or more employees.
The following manufacturing and industry
classifications with Lost Work Day Injury/Illness rates
above 16 comprise the initial SST pool:
0783 ORNAMENTAL SHRUB AND TREE SERVICES
4210 LOCAL TRUCKING WITH STORAGE
4220 PUBLIC WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE
4230 TRUCKING TERMINAL FACILITIES
4490 WATER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
4510 AIR TRANSPORTATION, SCHEDULED
4580 AIRPORTS, FLYING FIELDS, & SERVICES
4783 PACKING AND CRATING
4953 REFUSE SYSTEMS
5010 MOTOR VEHICLES, PARTS, AND SUPPLIES
5050 METALS AND MINERALS, EXC. PETROLEUM
5093 SCRAP AND WASTE MATERIALS
5140 GROCERIES AND RELATED PRODUCTS
5180 BEER, WINE, AND DISTILLED BEVERAGES
5210 LUMBER AND OTHER BUILDING MATERIALS
8050 NURSING AND PERSONAL CARE FACILITIES
SICs with final digit of zero are three-digit
SICs and include all four-digit SICs with the same first
three digits. If you need to find out your SIC, there
is an on-line SIC code manual at http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/sicser.html
If an area office completes their first
list, they can request a new list. The second list will
contain firms with LWDII rates of 10 and above in the
same SIC codes. This is only a quick notification of
the existence of the new directive, for more details
it is advisable to check the directive on the OSHA web
Letters Sent To High LWDII Rate Employers
OSHA has sent letters to 12,500 employers
with LWDII rates of 8.0 and above to notify them of
OSHA's concern for their injury/illness rate and to
recommend action be taken. No requirements or partnerships
are offered in this letter.
Recent Illinois Fatalities
Struck by freight pallet - Employee began
moving several ton freight pallet out of a truck manually
instead of using a forklift. As he was moving out of
the truck and out of the path of the pallet, his foot
got stuck in a 5" by 72" hole between the end of the
truck and the truck dock. The pallet's mass/inertia
cut his leg off and he died. (Note to those with docks:
this was a standard dock with two rubber bumpers. No
dock plate was in use. The hole his foot got caught
in was the hole formed by the two rubber bumpers, the
dock, and the truck. The company was cited for the floor
Struck by truck - Brakes failed on parked
refuse truck, truck rolled down incline and crushed
driver against a fence.
Crushed by elevator lift - Employee riding
small product elevator was crushed between vertically
moving platform and horizontal bracing of the lift structure.
Machine guarding/in running nip point
- Employee checking unusual noise at slitter roll stand
in a steel mill kicked the spindle box. In running rolls
caught his foot and dragged him into the machine up
to his chest.
Pressure vessel testing - Pressure vessel
undergoing 1275 psig hydrostatic test had catastrophic
failure of gasket. Millwright standing near the flange
joint of the vessel was struck in the face by high pressure
Struck by truck - After fueling an airplane,
the fuel truck backed up and struck an employee.
Exploding car tire - Car tire was lying
on the floor of the service station, with an individual
bent over the tire filling it from a 150 psi compressor.
The tire exploded, striking him in the face.
Struck by truck - Landfill truck driver's
view was obstructed by the truck's load, and as he backed
the truck he ran over an employee.
Confined space entry - Employee entered
the top of a silo and was overcome by an oxygen deficient
atmosphere. Confined space entry procedures were not
Struck by machined part - Part broke
loose from the chuck jaws of a turret lathe, striking
Electrocution - Lineman repairing a storm-damaged
line contacted a line and was electrocuted. The storm
had jumpered a second line to the line under repair,
Struck by tractor - Mower operator on
golf course was run over by tractor and mower.
Flammable explosion - Employee making
repairs to truck gasoline tank lit a propane torch without
ventilating the area to eliminate flammable vapors.
Vapors exploded, killing the employee.
and Other Industrial Incidents
Explosion at cylinder rehab firm - At
an outdoor storage area of a propane cylinder rehabilitation
firm, gas from a leaking cylinder ignited, causing many
other cylinders to explode. Metal shrapnel was hurled
throughout the adjacent neighborhood. Employees did
a good job of evacuating the facility, and no one was
hurt. A forklift not approved for this operation was
used and may have been the ignition source.
Press Amputation - Employee's hand was
crushed by a part revolution press and amputated at
the wrist. The spring on the inch control was broken,
allowing the press to be inched with one hand instead
of two hand controls as designed. Set up operator reached
around back of press to catch a part, the press cycled
instead of inching, catching the employee's hand.
Press Amputation - Temporary employee
clearing away scrap behind a mechanical power press
placed his hand on the press to maintain his balance.
The press operator cycled the press not realizing the
other employee was behind the press. The back and sides
of the press were not guarded. Four fingers were amputated.
The temp employee was certified by the temp agency as
a press operator, but his only prior experience was
in food service.
Press Amputation - A setup person had
completed press setup and was running a few parts. The
press was equipped for a full barrier guard or pull
backs. The setup person did not use either guarding
device. The press either double-tripped, or the setup
person unintentionally stepped on the foot pedal while
his hand was in the point of operation.
Press Amputation - An employee attempting
to unjam a part in the die on a mechanical power press
reached through a hinged plate in the guard and accidentally
stepped on the foot pedal, amputating three fingers.
in Lieu of Lockout
An issue we grapple with frequently is
the practice of using an interlock system instead of
physically locking out a machine. An example would be
a hinged guard which has an electrical interlock device
installed: when the guard is opened the interlock breaks
contact, shutting off control power to the machine.
An employer relying on interlocks to
protect an employee from the point of operation will
receive a citation for lockout or machine guarding (and
often receives a citation for both issues). In OSHA's
view, interlocks may only be used as a substitute for
fixed fasteners connecting a guard to a machine. We
do not accept interlocks in lieu of locking out a machine
for the following reasons:
- Interlocks can be defeated,
- Interlock devices can fail,
- Typical interlock wiring shuts off
power to the control circuit only. Full power is still
available to the operating parts of the machine and
the employee can thus be exposed to unexpected machine
- We have investigated a number of amputations
caused by failed or bypassed interlocks.
We performed an inspection of an amputation
where interlocks were used instead of locking out the
machine. Interlocks may have played a part in the injury
(guarding was also an issue). An employee was setting
up a machine which used an interlocked gate to cut control
power. During set up the machine unexpectedly activated,
and the employee experienced amputations and severe
trauma. This could easily have been a fatality. Citations
were issued for guarding and lockout.
Another amputation case involved a machine
with a defeated interlock. Parts being pressed in the
machine often stuck to the hot die, and the guard got
in the way of removing these parts. In this case the
guard was rotated out of the way, and the interlock
on the guard was defeated by supervision/employees.
When a new employee reached in to clear a part, the
machine activated and caught her arm in the die, and
she lost most of the arm.
In a third case an interlock failed but
no one was injured. An employee performing set up opened
an interlocked guard as a means of shutting the machine
off, and then activated the machine start button to
insure that the machine would not start. The machine
promptly started because the interlock device failed.
The employee did not perform set up and was spared potential
injury. This example again illustrated OSHA's point:
interlocks can fail.
Please check out your equipment and procedures
for reliance on interlocks instead of locking out, and
don't rely on interlocks.
Knockout box extension cords - It's easy
to put together an extension cord from a metal knockout
box and an electrical cord. These are often seen on
construction sites, but are also observed in manufacturing.
These custom made extension cords may be quick and inexpensive,
but they also present electrical hazards. Knockout boxes
are designed to be mounted on fixed surfaces, and are
not appropriate for unsecured use for these reasons:
1. Knockouts can be displaced, exposing
live electrical parts through the knockout holes.
2. Cords may pull out of the box due
to lack of strain relief at the cord and box connection.
3. As the box is moved and knocked around,
connections inside the box can and do come loose; when
the hot lead contacts the metal box the box becomes
4. Plastic outlet plates often crack
and break, exposing live connections.
5. Finally, use of a knockout box extension
cord in a wet location is hazardous.
Knockout boxes were designed to be secured
to surfaces, please use them that way.
References: 1910.303(b)(2) and 1999 NEC
300-11(a) "... boxes, cabinets, and fittings shall be
securely fastened in place."
A Word on "Employee Carelessness" and
Some supervisors have the opinion that
most occupational injuries are caused by employee error
or carelessness. They will even quote an unnamed study
that proves this (we are not sure what study they are
talking about). We don't agree with the employee error
theory. The attitude that employee error causes most/all
injuries is often a roadblock to correction of hazards,
as the supervisor fails to do a complete accident investigation.
Supervisors need to take the time to find and fix the
problem in order to reduce injuries and the costs associated
Case in point: On a recent inspection
of a plastic fabricator, our compliance officer noted
an unguarded table saw. In interviewing the table saw
operator, she discovered that the table saw had cut
his middle finger, amputating it up to the first joint,
and that the fourth finger had nerve damage from the
saw cut. The compliance officer obtained a copy of the
Supervisor's First Report of Injury, and here are the
plant manager's findings:
THE INJURY: Saw cut on fingers of right hand.
FOR INJURY: Plastic part kicked back, table
saw blade entered fingers.
CONDITIONS, METHODS, OR LACK OF PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
CONTRIBUTED?: (this section was left blank)
HOW DID ACCIDENT
OCCUR?: Operator error.
ACT CAUSED THE INJURY?: Inexperience.
ENTRY: cut right finger
The injury had occurred on the table
saw in April 1998, and almost one year later the saw
remained unguarded! We don't think that the finger amputation
would have occurred if a saw blade guard was in place,
despite any operator error or inexperience. To their
credit, the employer asked how they could improve in
this regard. Our suggestion to the company was to do
a more thorough investigation in the future. In this
case, the report should have said something to the effect
of "Unguarded table saw blade cut/amputated employees
fingers. Guard has been installed and supervision will
ensure that guard is used."
Most injuries can be prevented. A thorough
investigation of incidents will help pinpoint physical
hazards and go a long way toward improving the company's
injury/illness record. Injury investigations have a
purpose beyond simply reporting the incident to the
workers comp carrier: to help the company control/reduce
the number of injuries. If completion of the first report
of injury is viewed in this way (and as something more
than just filling out paperwork or as a means to limit
liability), progress can be made in cutting injuries
and comp costs.
1) My company is in the process of developing
a record retention policy. Is there a document that
presently exists that would list all of the required
documentation and retention period for each of OSHA's
We don't know a document listing records
retention requirements from all the OSHA standards,
but would be happy to develop one for transmission to
our subscribers. If any of you have a records retention
policy, we would appreciate it if you would send it
to us to assist in our effort.
2) We had a discussion yesterday about
employee access to OSHA 200 logs and if employees can
see the entire log. Could you answer the question in
the e-mail newsletter, please?
According to the Blue Book, page 58,
question a-4, employees have the right to see and/or
copy the entire log, including the names of the injured
3) Do I need a respirator program for
voluntary use of a one strap dust mask purchased at
a hardware store?
According to a Chicago Region 5 interpretation
letter dated 4/20/98, the voluntary use of an uncertified
dust mask such as the type that can be purchased at
a hardware store is covered under the respirator
standard. However, the only requirements which would
need to be met are the same as for voluntary use of
NIOSH certified filtering facepiece dust masks: (1)
provide a copy of Appendix D of the respirator standard,
and (2) make sure the mask itself does not pose a hazard
(i.e. don't store it where it could pick up materials
which could cause problems such as skin irritation).
This answer assumes that an air contaminant
overexposure does not exist.
As of 5/10/99, the proposed recordkeeping
standard had not gone to the Office of Management and
Budget for review. However, OSHA is still pushing hard
to publish the final rule this year. The new standard
is now expected to be published two-three months later
than the June 1999 target date, with an effective date
of January 1, 2000. OSHA will conduct extensive training
and outreach on the new rule following publication.
Favorite OSHA Web Addresses
The OSHA web site is becoming more and
more popular each month. January 1999 had 12.3 million
hits to www.osha.gov, and two months later in March
there were 17.3 million hits. Here are some of our favorite
spots on the OSHA Internet:
Includes the "Blue Book" and information
on the proposed standard.
The draft ergo standard is available
standards and interps: http://www.osha-slc.gov/OshStd_toc/OSHA_Std_toc.html
When you select a specific standard such
as 1910.212, hit the interpretation button near the
beginning of the section for all related interpretation
new/proposed standards: http://www.osha-slc.gov/Reg_Agenda_toc/UA_toc_by_RIN.html
This is OSHA's regulatory agenda which
is published every six months.
inspection history: http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/
Establishment search tracks the inspection
history of any company.
frequently cited: http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/
Frequently cited standards are available
for various industries.
In March 1999, the Aurora OSHA Office
received a national award for OSHA Innovators of the
Year. This award was for the electronic mail newsletters
OSHA News for Industry and Aurora Construction
News. A good portion of the award nomination proposal
consisted of testimonials and positive feedback from
our readers. Thank you for your support.
ASSE/OSHA Joint Safety Conference
- The 11th annual conference has been scheduled for
9/27-28/99, Rosemont, Illinois Holiday Inn. This meeting
is co-sponsored by a number of groups, including the
NE Illinois Chapter of the ASSE, Chicagoland federal
OSHA offices, and the OSHA Training Institute. Contact
this office for additional information.
OSHA 10 hour course - The
Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs/On-Site
Consultation Service is offering an OSHA 10 hour course
for $25. The next two courses are scheduled for:
August 3 and 4, 1999 Manteno, IL
November 3 and 10, 1999 Effingham, IL
Please contact Tony DeAssuncao at 217-524-4141
for details on the 10 hour course.
These are the complaint issues received
by the Aurora office. The first four are in order and
represent 80% of the complaints received. The remaining
issues are in random order.
1) Air Contaminants
2) Housekeeping - Sanitation
3) Personal Protective Equipment including Respirators
4) Electrical hazards
5) Struck by - storage hazards
9) Confined Space Entry
10) Bloodborne Pathogens
12) Machine Guarding
13) Emergency Response for Chemical Spills
18) Fire Protection/Egress
19) Structural Collapse
21) Process Safety Management
22) Carbon Monoxide
24) Hazard Communication
25) Fall Hazards
Cited Serious Violations By Program Area
Interim Targeting Inspection Program
Aurora Area Office
4/10/98 - 5/1/99
- 1910.212 Machine Guarding
- 1910.132 Personal Protective Equipment
- 1910.147 Lockout/Tagout, Electrical
Safe Work Practices
- 1910.22 Walking and Working Surfaces
- 1910.303 Electrical Hazards
- Machine Guarding
- unguarded point of operation, unadjusted work rests
and tongue guards, unguarded belts and pulleys
- PPE - no hazard
assessment, incorrect PPE, deficient respirator program,
- deficient written program, not using locks, not
Surfaces - unguarded floor openings, missing guardrails,
- Electrical Hazards
- frayed wires, defective cords, blocked electrical
- General Duty Clause
- unguarded conveyor, defective cranes, deficient
medical surveillance programs for employees exposed
to silica, deficient lighting, misuse of golf carts,
not marking capacity on custom made hooks
- Hazard Communication
- deficient written program, lack of training, missing
- Powered Industrial
Trucks - high carbon monoxide in emissions, defective
trucks not removed from services, operating trucks
without adequate lighting
- Industrial Noise
- employees exposed to noise above 90 dBA, no hearing
conservation program, not performing annual audiograms,
not using hearing protection
- First Aid - not
providing eye wash facilities when working with corrosive
- Powered Hand Tools - defective cords,
using air pressure above 30 p.s.i. to clean clothing
- Flammable and Combustible
Materials - incorrect flammable storage, not grounding
during dispensing flammable materials
- Confined Space
- deficient written program, not following written
procedures during an entry
- Air Contaminants
- over exposure to silica, carbon monoxide, and total
- Welding - incorrect
PPE, improper procedures for welding on containers
containing flammable materials
Cited Serious Violations
Aurora Area Office
First Half Federal FY-1999
10/1/98 - 3/31/99
1. Section 5(a)(1) General Duty Clause
2. 1910.212(a)(1) General Machine Guarding
3. 1910.1200(h) Hazard Communication Training
4. 1910.23(c)(1) Walking/working surfaces
5. 1910.147(c)(1) Lockout program
6. 1910.147(d)(4)(I) Lockout devices not affixed
7. 1910.1000(e) Air contaminant overexposure/engineering
8. 1910.133(a)(1) Eye/face protection
9. 1910.305(b)(2) Covers for electrical boxes
10. 1910.147(c)(7)(I)(a) Lockout training
Comments on Frequent Serious Violations
1. General Duty Clause - Many of the
general duty violations were observed on the Interim
Targeting Inspection Program. ITIP visits are comprehensive
wall-to-wall inspections, and we are taking a good look
for hazards. See the next section of the newsletter
for a description of various 5(a)(1)s issued in the
past six months.
2. General Machine Guarding - For machine
guarding hazards, OSHA looks to see if an employee can
access the machine hazard by going over, under, around,
or through the machinery or any existing guarding.
3. Hazard Communication Training - The
purchase of new types of chemical products or employees
transferred from one department to another may spur
the need for additional chemical hazard training.
4. Walking/working surfaces - Floor openings,
platform guardrails, ladders, and stairway guardrails
5. Lockout program - Many firms continue
to have no lockout program at all, and of those that
do have a written program, the program often does not
include specific written procedures for each machine
as required. An annual evaluation of the lockout program
is also required.
6. Lock not used - We are making the
effort to observe maintenance and servicing operations.
It is surprising how many firms are not using locks.
A periodic audit done in-house would help these sites
to identify the problem of not using locks.
7. Air contaminant engineering controls
- Air contaminant violations have broken into the top
10 serious hazards for the first time in memory, and
it happened for two reasons. First of all, under the
Interim Targeting Inspection Program we are visiting
a different mix of sites than under past scheduling
systems, and our industrial hygienists are doing a lot
of sampling on these sites. Secondly, in the first half
of the fiscal year there were a number of carbon monoxide
poisoning incidents caused by forklift exhaust gas buildup
8. Eye/face protection - Protective equipment
programs are an area of concentration for the Aurora
office this year. We have asked our industrial hygiene
compliance officers to conduct a thorough review of
9. Electrical box covers - Outlet boxes
and panel boxes were missing covers/faceplates.
10. Lockout training - We continue to
investigate lockout programs on all industry inspections,
and part of the process is to check employee training
records and interview employees on their training. In
some cases maintenance employees have not been trained.
In other cases, OSHA is citing for machine operators
who are doing machine set up, cleaning, and unjamming
equipment. Machine operators doing this kind of servicing
and maintenance work are "authorized employees" under
the lockout standard, and need authorized employee training.
General Duty Clause
Aurora Area Office, 10/1/98 - 3/31/99
Climbing up on equipment, 8 foot fall
Inadequate/damaged lifting devices
Frayed electrical cord on electromagnet
No capacity markings (multiple instances)
Plate clamp no marking for plate thickness
Custom made dual spreader bar not proof
tested (device was manufactured in-house)
Custom made scissor clamp not proof tested
(device manufactured in-house)
Eye bolts and hoist rings not marked
with rated load
Custom made grab hooks not marked, proof
tested, inspected, minimum design factor of 3
----- For above items, see ANSI B30.20
Below The Hook Lifting Devices standard
Restaurant deep fryer not drained or
allowed to cool before cleaning
Ignition system of propane heater permanently
wired in the "on" position (gas would continue to flow
even if the flame was extinguished)
Mopping floors with xylene and toluene
Tuberculosis control program
Powered Industrial Trucks
Not using seat belts when provided on
Using rough terrain forklift to move
When You Change Your E-Mail Address...
If you want to keep receiving these newsletters,
please e-mail us change of electronic address. We find
that 5-7% of the electronic mail subscriber base changes
their e-mail address every three months, mostly through
changing internet service providers and job changes.
When the list was small, we telephoned people whose
e-mail address failed in order to determine the new
address. As the list gets larger (it is now at 750),
it is becoming more and more difficult to find the time
to telephone for the new address. In the near future,
we plan on discontinuing the practice of telephoning
for changed e-mail addresses.
Please send an address change, just as
you would if you moved your residence.
About Our Newsletters
OSHA News for Industry is issued twice
a year. Aurora OSHA Construction News is issued approximately
four times a year. If you have comments, suggestions
for future articles, or questions, please contact:
U.S. Department of Labor - OSHA
344 Smoke Tree Business Park
North Aurora, IL 60542
Requests to be added to the e-mail list
should include a name and phone number. Please indicate
general industry news, construction news, or both. We
also like to have your company name and location, but