On March 9, 2018, Governor Baker signed a bill that amends M.G.L. chapter 149 §6 ½. The law was updated to clarify employee safety requirements in public sector workplaces and is enforced by the Department of Labor Standards (DLS). Highlights:
We visit this topic again and again, the short answer is NO! According to ASME Section VIII, Division 1 (UG-135) and API RP 520, Pressure Safety Valves (PSVs) must be installed in a vertical position with the spindle (stem) oriented upright. Installing a valve horizontally is considered a significant deviation from engineering standards and can
The rule revisions follow OSHA’s updates to its general industry standards addressing slip, trip, and fall hazards (OSHA Subpart D, Walking-Working Surfaces) and its changes to its requirements for personal fall protection systems (in OSHA Subpart I, Personal Protective Equipment). The effective date of the amended General Industry Part 2. Walking-Working Surfaces is February 2,
To continue with my series of LOTO articles this month, I want to discuss how 1910.147 plays into our efforts to enter a Permit-Required Confined Space (PRCS). Way too many PRCS entry permits have the basic check-the-box statement “All energy sources isolated – YES/NO.” What the heck is that supposed to meet? Do our “machine
Some safety professionals think the stories of workers dying in air-supplied respirators hooked into an inert gas supply are “urban safety myths”. Granted, these incidents are rare, but they do happen and they almost always result in a fatality. Here are some of the OSHA Case files from such incidents…
OSHA’s Slings Standard (29 CFR 1910.184) specifies several paperwork requirements, depending on the type of sling paragraph (e) of the Standard covers alloy steel chain slings; paragraph (f) covers wire rope slings; paragraph (g) covers metal mesh slings; paragraph (h) covers natural and synthetic fiber-rope slings; and paragraph (i) covers synthetic web slings) The purpose of each of
The following were the top 10 most frequently cited standards by Federal OSHA in the fiscal year 2017 (October 1, 2016, through September 30, 2017):
A wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) operated a trucking unit that transported wastewater. The business that owned the facility and trucking unit applied for insurance coverage. In their insurance application and related correspondence, the business represented that they did not accept, process, transport, or discharge hazardous waste. The insurance company issued a $2 million “Primary Environmental
This was an interesting decision, as I have always been amazed at the legalities involved with which agency enforces which rules at a specific workplace. Some workplaces will have to comply with BOTH OSHA and MSHA standards, making safety management even more complicated. This case involved a “mining company” but the complaint and subsequent citations
OSHA has cited a power company and a contractor after five workers were killed, (1 plant operator and four contractors) and one other suffered serious burns. In June 2017, OSHA determined that the workers were burned when a blockage inside a coal-fired furnace broke free and spewed molten slag into the work area. Employees of
Industry petitioned for review of five issues: whether substantial evidence supports OSHA’s finding that limiting workers’ silica exposure to the level set by the Rule reduces a significant risk of material health impairment; whether substantial evidence supports OSHA’s finding that the Rule is technologically feasible for the foundry, hydraulic fracturing, and construction industries; whether substantial
