Sawmill Cited by OSHA for Violations After a Worker Was Killed

DALLAS – The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Nix Forest Industries Inc. in Timpson, Texas, with 17 safety and health violations, including one willful, after a worker was killed in December 2012 when he was struck by a broken band saw blade and other workers were exposed to hazards at the sawmill.

The willful violation resulted from failing to use control procedures for hazardous energy when cleaning, removing debris and unjamming equipment and machinery. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

Some of the 14 serious safety violations cited include failing to provide easily understood lockout/tagout training for energy control, failing to certify that energy control training was completed and current and failing to ensure that tagout devices were affixed to clearly indicate the operation or movement of the energy isolating device. Violations were also cited for failing to guard machines, ensure that pulleys with parts less than 7 feet from the floor were guarded, ensure that entry point warning signs were posted at possible low carriage areas, ensure band saw wheels were completely enclosed or guarded, and ensure flexible cords and cables were not used as substitutes for fixed wiring. One health violation was cited for failing to administer an effective hearing conservation program for workers exposed to occupational noise. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

An other-than-serious violation was cited for failing to ensure that an OSHA 300A injury and illness form was properly certified. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

“Nix Forest Industries failed to take adequate measures to protect workers from a variety of hazards, including being struck-by and caught-between machinery and equipment,” said Stephen Boyd, OSHA’s area director in Dallas. “Following OSHA standards saves lives. This unfortunate loss of life could possibly have been avoided.”

The citations can be viewed at http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/NixForestIndustriesInc_771461_0603_13.pdf* and http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/NixForestIndustriesInc_798862_0603_13.pdf*.

Proposed penalties total $116,200. The company, which specializes in cutting lumber to size for its customers, has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s Dallas area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

To ask questions, obtain compliance assistance, file a complaint, or report workplace hospitalizations, fatalities or situations posing imminent danger to workers, the public should call OSHA’s toll-free hotline at 800-321-OSHA (6742) or the agency’s Dallas office at 214-320-2400.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to ensure these conditions exist for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Gilman Cheese Could Face $126700 Fine From OSHA

Gilman Cheese Corp. could have to pay $126,700 after OSHA cited them for 10 safety violations.

One of the violations involved an unguarded cheese packing and labeling machine, resulting in an employee having two fingers amputated. OSHA found that another worker suffered a similar amputation in January 2012.

“This tragedy could have been prevented if Gilman Cheese Corp. ensured adequate machine guarding and lockout/tagout procedures,” said Mark Hysell, OSHA’s area director in Eau Claire. “Too often, compromised safety procedures have tragic consequences. OSHA is committed to protecting workers on the job.”

Additionally, six serious violations involve inadequate guarding on a bench grinder and a portable grinder; lack of adequate emergency eyewash stations for workers handling corrosives; operating powered industrial vehicles without adequate training and inspections; using a flexible cord as permanent wiring; lack of an electrical safety program; and failing to provide training on bloodborne pathogens to those who cleaned equipment following the amputation. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

Two other-than-serious violations include obstructing a means of egress and using compressed air greater than 30 pounds per square inch for cleaning. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

Because of the hazards and the willful violations cited, Gilman Cheese Corp. has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law.

WI Cheese Worker Loses Fingers To Unguarded Machine

Gilman, WI (WorkersCompensation.com) – The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Gilman Cheese Corp. for 10 safety violations totaling $126,700 in proposed fines. A worker had two fingers amputated by an unguarded cheese packing and labeling machine at the Gilman factory. A January inspection was prompted by a referral. OSHA found that another worker suffered a similar amputation in January 2012.

“This tragedy could have been prevented if Gilman Cheese Corp. ensured adequate machine guarding and lockout/tagout procedures,” said Mark Hysell, OSHA’s area director in Eau Claire. “Too often, compromised safety procedures have tragic consequences. OSHA is committed to protecting workers on the job.”

Two willful violations involve failing to develop and train workers on machine-specific lockout procedures to prevent unexpected start-up and lockout machinery during servicing and maintenance, and to provide adequate machine guarding. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

Additionally, six serious violations involve inadequate guarding on a bench grinder and a portable grinder; lack of adequate emergency eyewash stations for workers handling corrosives; operating powered industrial vehicles without adequate training and inspections; using a flexible cord as permanent wiring; lack of an electrical safety program; and failing to provide training on bloodborne pathogens to those who cleaned equipment following the amputation. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

Two other-than-serious violations include obstructing a means of egress and using compressed air greater than 30 pounds per square inch for cleaning. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

Because of the hazards and the willful violations cited, Gilman Cheese Corp. has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law. Under the program, OSHA may inspect any of the employer’s facilities or job sites. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=DIRECTIVESp_id=4503.

The current citations may be viewed at http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/Gilman_Cheese_Corp_829801_06-07-13.pdf*. The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director, or contest the citations and penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Texas Sawmill Cited After A Worker Was Killed

Dallas, TX (WorkersCompensation.com) – The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Nix Forest Industries Inc. in Timpson, Texas, with 17 safety and health violations, including one willful, after a worker was killed in December 2012 when he was struck by a broken band saw blade and other workers were exposed to hazards at the sawmill.

The willful violation resulted from failing to use control procedures for hazardous energy when cleaning, removing debris and unjamming equipment and machinery. A willful violation is one committed with intentional, knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

Some of the 14 serious safety violations cited include failing to provide easily understood lockout/tagout training for energy control, failing to certify that energy control training was completed and current and failing to ensure that tagout devices were affixed to clearly indicate the operation or movement of the energy isolating device. Violations were also cited for failing to guard machines, ensure that pulleys with parts less than 7 feet from the floor were guarded, ensure that entry point warning signs were posted at possible low carriage areas, ensure band saw wheels were completely enclosed or guarded, and ensure flexible cords and cables were not used as substitutes for fixed wiring. One health violation was cited for failing to administer an effective hearing conservation program for workers exposed to occupational noise. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

An other-than-serious violation was cited for failing to ensure that an OSHA 300A injury and illness form was properly certified. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

“Nix Forest Industries failed to take adequate measures to protect workers from a variety of hazards, including being struck-by and caught-between machinery and equipment,” said Stephen Boyd, OSHA’s area director in Dallas. “Following OSHA standards saves lives. This unfortunate loss of life could possibly have been avoided.”

The citations can be viewed at http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/NixForestIndustriesInc_771461_0603_13.pdf* and http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/NixForestIndustriesInc_798862_0603_13.pdf*.

Proposed penalties total $116,200. The company, which specializes in cutting lumber to size for its customers, has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s Dallas area director or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

OSHA Cites Lumadue Excavating for Allegedly Exposing Workers to Trenching …

OSHA cited Lumadue Excavating LLC for 12 alleged safety violations involving trenching hazards and placed the company in the Severe Violator Enforcement Program.

OSHA initiated two inspections under a special emphasis program on trenching and excavation when inspectors found unprotected trenches at two different work sites. One of the trenches was 7 feet deep and the other more than 5 feet deep, according to the agency. Proposed penalties total $178,860.

“This company continues to take unnecessary safety risks by not utilizing the safeguards needed to protect workers from trenching hazards,” said Mark Stelmack, director of OSHA’s Wilkes-Barre office. Detailed information on safeguards for excavation and trenching can be found on OSHA’s Web site.

Two alleged willful violations, with $92,400 in penalties, involve failing to provide a protective system to prevent a trench cave-in. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

Five repeat violations, with $73,920 in penalties, involve failing to instruct workers in the recognition and avoidance of hazardous conditions, provide a safe means of egress from trenches and ensure excavations are inspected daily by a competent person. A repeat violation is issued when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last 5 years. Similar violations were cited in 2008 and 2009.

Because of the nature of the hazards and the violations cited, Lumadue has been placed in OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP), which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law. OSHA’s SVEP focuses on recalcitrant employers that endanger workers by committing willful, repeat or failure-to-abate violations. Under the program, OSHA may inspect any of the employer’s facilities if it has reasonable grounds to believe there are similar violations.

Additionally, three serious violations, which carry $12,540 in penalties, were cited for the lack of reflective vests for workers exposed to vehicular traffic and excavated material not farther than 2 feet from the edge of the trench. A serious citation is issued when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

Two other-than-serious violations, carrying no penalties, involve the lack of a written hazard communication program and material safety data sheets. An other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

Lumadue has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with Stelmack or contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s ‘Operation Quick Strike’ Shuts …

Details

Category: Latest National News

Published on Friday, 26 April 2013 14:16

Written by Press Release

WASHINGTON–(ENEWSPF)–April 26, 2013.  The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has ordered Tucker, Ga.-based passenger carrier Best Limo Service to immediately cease all operations, declaring that its drivers and vehicles pose an imminent hazard to public safety.

This is the second shutdown of a passenger carrier following the deployment earlier this month of more than 50 specially trained safety investigators targeting high-risk passenger carriers.

“The traveling public deserves the highest level of safety, whether they board a plane, take a train or travel by commercial bus or van,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.  “Passenger carriers that fail to comply with federal safety regulations and put people’s lives at risk will not be allowed to operate.”

Best Limo Service operates both motorcoaches and passenger vans providing tours and charter services throughout the southeastern United States.

An investigation by FMCSA investigators launched earlier this month uncovered serious regulatory violations demonstrating Best Limo Service’s disregard for motor coach passenger safety. 

Drivers who had previously tested positive for a controlled substance, or who had a suspended commercial driver’s license, were allowed by the company to transport passengers.

In addition, FMCSA investigators found that Best Limo Service’s lack of oversight of its drivers’ compliance with federal hours-of-service requirements resulted in overly fatigued drivers being allowed to transport passengers.

Best Limo Service’s vehicle maintenance program was found to be inadequate and found to pose an imminent hazard.  On-site inspections of three of Best Limo Service’s buses resulted in all three placed out-of-serve for critical safety violations.

“Our FMCSA staff is working diligently as a team to move as quickly as possible in shutting down unsafe passenger carriers from coast to coast,” said FMCSA Administrator Anne S. Ferro.  “We recognize the imperative of getting these operators off the road; the safety of everyone who travels on our highways and roads is on the line.”

As part of FMCSA’s work to make safety data readily available to the traveling public, the SaferBus mobile app gives bus riders a quick and free way to review a bus company’s safety record before buying a ticket or booking group travel. The SaferBus app, available for iPhone, iPad and Android phone users, can be downloaded for free by visiting FMCSA’s “Look Before You Book” webpage at www.fmcsa.dot.gov/saferbus.

Travelers planning a bus trip are also encouraged to think safety first before buying a ticket or chartering a bus by using FMCSA’s multilingual passenger carrier safety checklist at:  http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/pcs/Index.aspx.

FMCSA urges consumers and whistleblowers to report any unsafe bus company, vehicle or driver to the agency through a toll free hotline 1-888-DOT-SAFT (1-888-368-7238) or FMCSA’s consumer complaint web site:  http://nccdb.fmcsa.dot.gov/HomePage.asp.

As to bus companies that FMCSA has recently placed out of service, consumers who paid for their ticket by credit card may be entitled to a credit from their credit card company under the Fair Credit Billing Act. For more information visit:  http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/pcs/bus-credit-refund.aspx.

A copy of today’s imminent hazard out-of-service order can be viewed at www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/about/news/2013/BestLimoService.pdf.

Source: dot.gov

Report: Food on American tables costs a life a day

WASHINGTON – The food on your dining table comes at a particularly high price, and we don’t mean in dollars and cents.

We mean in lives.

A recent report from the Center for Progressive Reform, citing federal data, says one farm worker dies on the job every day of the year.  Hundreds more get injured or ill.

“The hazards of farm work run the gamut,” the report adds.  ”Oppressive heat is common in every area with major agriculture.  Heavy loads and repetitive motion strain workers’ bodies.  Slips, trips, and falls happen on a regular basis.  Irrigation equipment can electrocute workers.  Tractors overturn.  Workers can become entrapped in grain silos and engulfed in clouds of pesticides.  In short, farm work is dangerous business.”

The farm workers whom the report cites are 98 percent non-union because federal labor law excludes farm workers from its coverage.  That lack of protection, among other factors – many farm workers are immigrants and 44 percent don’t speak English — are not the only workers who die on the job.  They’re just some of the most-frequent victims.

Last year, they were joined by truck drivers killed in crashes, 17 union workers dying in derailments, warehouse workers in Illinois and California, toiling for Wal-Mart, who collapse in 110-degree heat, and even utility linemen shot to death by irate customers, among others.  Some 4,000 workers died on the job, federal data calculate.  

And while industrial accidents that kill and injure dozens of workers, such as the ammonia plant blast in Texas, get the headlines, job safety and health violations, unco-vered by state and federal inspectors, occur almost every day and many go unreported.

In one typical example, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced just in mid-April that it wants to fine the New England Confectionery Company in Revere, Mass., $133,000 for widespread and willful health and safety violations inspectors found there last year.  Multiply Revere by hundreds of plants.

Meanwhile, Workers Memorial Day ceremonies nationwide on April 28 honored all workers killed on the job, including the truck drivers, the rail workers, the ammonia plant workers and the farm workers.  The theme of the observances, as always, was “Pray for the dead, fight like hell for the living.”

Commemorations ranged from a prayer vigil with bagpipes and a bugle at a workers’ memorial in Cumberland, Md., to an annual remembrance of the 506 workers who died over the years at U.S. Steel’s plant in Gary, Ind.

Indiana’s GOP governor was scheduled to attend a ceremony on the state capitol grounds, the state AFL-CIO said.  And there was another memorial ceremony at the Manhattan site of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire.  It killed 146, 101 years ago.

Besides the workers who die on the job every year — a number that declined sharply since unions pushed through the law creating OSHA in 1970 — hundreds of thousands more suffer on-the-job injuries or illnesses.  OSHA does what it can to stop the carnage, unionists say, but neither the law nor the agency is strong enough.

The best honor those workers could get, the union leaders say, is for Congress to beef up OSHA’s strength, adding inspectors, increasing fines, and extending its coverage to the 22 million federal, state and local government workers: Teachers, Fire Fighters, police, corrections officers and more.  The maximum fine against a firm when a worker dies on the job is $7,500.  And the law should have more and better protections for whistleblowers, the unionists add.

“The toll of workplace injuries, illnesses, and deaths still remains enormous,” says Teamsters President James Hoffa, whose words could be echoed by other unionists when it comes to job safety and health.

“Truck drivers suffer more on-the-job fatalities than any other individual occupation.  Ergonomic hazards cripple and injure hundreds of thousands of workers every year and musculoskeletal disorder cases continue to increase and remain the nation’s biggest workplace safety and health problem, without corresponding standards to prevent them,” he continues.

“Hispanic and immigrant workers, who often work in the most dangerous jobs and are exploited by employers, have no union protections and are afraid to speak out….Hundreds of workers are fired or harassed by their employers each year simply for voicing job-safety concerns or reporting injuries.  Although there are dozens of whistleblower protection and anti-retaliation laws, some are simply too weak and others are just not aggressively enforced due to insufficient funding of the regulatory agencies.”

Fixing some of the holes is the point of the Protecting America’s Workers Act (PAWA), reintroduced by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. George Miller, D-Calif.

But the biggest sanction OSHA now lacks, and that Murray’s bill does not provide, is to give the agency the power to unilaterally declare a worksite so unsafe that it must shut down.  Gary Beevers, the Steel Workers vice president who heads their oil and chemical workers sector, says that power would change corporate attitudes fast.

A multi-million-dollar fine means nothing, he says, to ExxonMobil.  Shutting an oil refinery whose leaking toxic fumes killed workers and others would.

Photo: Demonstrators march in honor of undocumented farm worker Maria Isabel Vasques Jimenez, who collapsed and died in a vineyard in 2008 when her employer denied her drinking water.   Rich Pedroncelli/AP

9th District rules safety violations an intentional tort

Login | April 08, 2013

9th District rules safety violations an intentional tort

SCOTT PIEPHO
Legal News Reporter
Published: April 8, 2013

An employer’s deliberate violation of safety standards can give rise to an intentional tort claim, the 9th District Court of Appeals ruled recently. In so doing, the court clarified a new state statute limiting employer intentional tort actions and the Ohio Supreme Court cases finding the statute constitutional.

The plaintiff in Smith v. Ray Esser and Sons Inc., Ryan Smith, had just begun working as an intern through a high school-sponsored program. His first days on the job, his employer and defendant in the action, Ray Esser and Sons, put him to work on a job repairing a leaking fire hydrant.

The employer had dug a trench approximately seven feet deep around the hydrant. For the next two days, rain water accumulated in the trench. When the work crew was able to return to the site, they pumped the rain water out and put Smith to work. The crew needed to remove the thrust block, a below-ground cement block that anchored the pipes feeding the hydrant. Smith was in the trench breaking down the thrust block with an electric chipping tool.

As he was working, his hand became trapped by shifting debris and at the same time the trench began filling with water. At that time, Ryan was alone in the trench and only one other person, his foreman Clouser, was on the site with him. Smith was able to escape from the trench, but his hand was severely injured.

Smith brought an intentional tort action against Esser and Sons. Normally, worker’s compensation is the exclusive remedy for a workplace injury, but Ohio law makes an exception when the employer commits an intentional tort against an employee. Traditionally, employees could bring an action under Ohio common law if an employer was aware that a task was substantially certain to result in an injury to the worker and assigned the task regardless.

Several times the Ohio legislature attempted to change the standard for employer intentional torts by statute. Twice the Ohio Supreme Court found those statutes unconstitutional. The legislature tried again, passing R.C. 2745.01(A). At the time Ryan’s case was before the trial court, the Ohio Supreme Court was considering whether the statute was constitutional.

In an earlier appeal, the 9th District had overturned the trial court’s first grant of summary judgment. During the pendency of Esser and Sons’ original motion for summary judgment, the Supreme Court found the statute constitutional in a pair of companion cases including Kaminsky v. Metal and Wire Products Co. In a reply brief Esser and Sons cited the statute and Kaminsky for the first time.

The court granted summary judgment, citing the statute and Kaminsky without further comment. On appeal from that decision the 9th District ruled that because Smith had not been given adequate notice of the grounds on which Esser and Sons was asking for summary judgment.

The statute R.C. 2745.01(A) provides that in an intentional tort action “the employer shall not be liable unless the plaintiff proves that the employer committed the tortious act with the intent to injure another or with the belief that the injury was substantially certain to occur.”

In subsection (B) the statute defines, “substantially certain” to mean “that an employer acts with deliberate intent to cause an employee to suffer an injury, a disease, a condition, or death.”

The statute also provides that “deliberate removal by an employer of an equipment safety guard or deliberate misrepresentation of a toxic or hazardous substance creates a rebuttable presumption that the removal or misrepresentation was committed with intent to injure another if an injury or an occupational disease or condition occurs as a direct result.”

The 9th District opinion cites several factual allegations which show that the defendant intentionally disregarded safety standards. First, the trench walls were nearly vertical in violation of OSHA regulations. Second, regulations require that when removing water from a trench, a qualified supervisor must oversee the operation; Clouser was not qualified to fill this role. Third, trench featured no safety devices such as shoring or a safety box.

Summarizing the employer’s actions, the court stated, “It is clear that Esser intentionally decided not to take necessary safety precautions with Ryan despite the fact that it had made a practice of putting such protections in place on prior projects.”

The court held that the employer’s actions could therefore give rise to an intentional tort claim and that Smith raised sufficient factual issues to avoid summary judgment. “[R]easonable minds could conclude that Esser was substantially certain that sending Ryan into the trench would result in injury.

[Back]

Company cited for 21 violations after worker’s finger is amputated

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited Smithville Manufacturing Co. for 21 health and safety violations, including one willful, after receiving a complaint that a worker’s finger was amputated at the facility by an unguarded press machine.

OSHA has proposed penalties of $65,800 as a result of the December 2012 inspection.

The willful violation was cited for failing to ensure point of operation guards were in place on mechanical power presses at the stamping facility, which does short-run productions of automotive parts. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law’s requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.

“Smithville Manufacturing has a responsibility to follow all safety guidelines, including the use of properly adjusted and adequate machine guarding to protect workers from injuries, such as amputations,” said Howard Eberts, OSHA’s area director in Cleveland. “Employers must recognize the hazards that exist in their workplaces and develop safety and health policies and procedures to protect workers on the job.”

A total of 18 serious violations were cited, nine of which involve lack of or improperly adjusted guarding on equipment, such as shears, grinders, screw machines and drill and power presses. Other violations involve failing to establish and train workers on energy control procedures; ensure employees lock out equipment prior to conducting maintenance or service; train workers on the use of fire extinguishers; establish die setting procedures; conduct weekly press inspections; develop a written hazard communication program; and train workers on the hazards of chemicals in the workplace. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

Two other-than-serious health violations were issued for failing to develop a written respiratory protection program and blood-borne pathogens program. An Other-than-serious violation is one that has a direct relationship to job safety and health, but probably would not cause death or serious physical harm.

The company has 15 days from receipt of the citations and proposed penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

To ask questions, obtain compliance assistance, file a complaint, or report workplace hospitalizations, fatalities or situations posing imminent danger to workers, the public should call OSHA’s toll-free hotline at 800-321-OSHA (6742) or the agency’s Omaha Area Office at 402-553-0171.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to ensure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit http://www.osha.gov.   

OSHA Fines NJ ASC for "Serious" Sharps Safety Violations

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Health East Ambulatory Surgical Center in Englewood, N.J., and fined the facility $68,000 for failing to protect an employee from exposure to bloodborne pathogen hazards.

According to an OSHA spokeswoman, the surgery center’s leadership did not do enough to prevent a needlestick from occurring during a procedure, including committing the following infractions:

• not having a method to determine how the needlestick occurred, which could hinder preventing its recurrence;

• not having a written procedure in the exposure control plan that includes researching, considering or implementing any new safety devices aimed at preventing needlesticks;
• failing to solicit input from non-managerial employees responsible for direct patient care in the identification, evaluation and selection of needles or other devices that could help prevent exposure to blood;
• failing to determine which of its employees could be exposed to blood or other potentially infectious materials;
• not testing the injured staff member’s blood as soon as feasible after the needlestick occurred;
• failing to make post-exposure prophylaxis (HIV-fighting meds) available in a timely manner to the injured employee;
• not counseling the injured employee following the incident;
• not providing the injured employee with a healthcare professional’s written evaluation of the needlestick, regarding medical conditions potentially resulting from the stick;
• not providing a copy of OSHA’s bloodborne pathogen standard to the injured employee’s healthcare provider;
• failing to provide a description of the exposed employee’s duties as they related to the needlestick incident;
• not providing documentation of the routes of exposure and circumstances under which the exposure occurred to the employee’s healthcare provider; and
• failing to provide the results of the injured employee’s blood test results to the employee’s healthcare provider.

OSHA deemed the violations “serious,” which it says indicates there was substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result and the employer knew, or should have known, of the hazard.

“If an employee is stuck with a needle, they must be afforded appropriate follow-up medical care to minimize any potential effect,” says Lisa Levy, director of OSHA’s office in Hasbrouck Heights, N.J. “All medical facilities have a duty to provide a safe and healthful workplace for their employees.”

The surgery center has 15 business days from being notified of the citations to pay the fine, request an informal conference with Ms. Levy or contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

A spokesman for the surgery center says the facility has a meeting with OSHA scheduled for next week to dispute all allegations.

Daniel Cook