Free

EPA RMP Citations @ food plant (NH3 & $37K)

Respondent is the owner and operator of a facility. On September 1, 2024, an incident at the Facility resulted in an accidental release. EPA requested follow-up information, and Respondent provided a response on May 27, 2025, regarding the Incident and Respondent’s compliance with Section 112(r) ofthe CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Based on the

Defining and Quantifying “incidental releases” and ones requiring an “emergency response”

This is a perfect (and sad) example of why releases of hazardous materials need to be DEFINED and QUANTIFIED so that personnel know their LIMITATIONS in responding to said releases. This exercise is part of our PRE-PLANNING, starting with using the Tier II forms we submit each year. Just understand, the Tier II forms are

Is this where we have arrived with Tech in the Safety Arena?!?! (Virtual PIT Evaluations?)

Background: 29 CFR 1910.178(l)(2)(iii) states: All operator training and evaluation shall be conducted by persons who have the knowledge, training, and experience to train powered industrial truck operators and evaluate their competence. Question #1: Can a person who has the knowledge, training, and experience to train powered industrial truck operators and evaluate their competence, clarified

Whether the respiratory protection medical evaluation may consider factors beyond respirator use (OSHA LOI)

OSHA answers two (2) Respiratory Protection Program questions: To what extent does OSHA’s Respiratory Protection standard, at 29 CFR ยง 1910.134(e), require that the PLHCP’s medical evaluation for respirator use include consideration of factors beyond respiratory protection that affect fitness to safely perform the expected job tasks while wearing a respirator?Is there a reasonable expectation

Scroll to Top