The First Facility Management Blog

After learning changes may be made in D.C. despite the advances in workplace safety efforts at the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) under the leadership of Dr. John Howard, the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) urges President George Bush to renew Howard’s appointment.

“ASSE has seen a significant advancement of the mission of NIOSH within the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Centers for Disease Control (CDC) under the creative and dedicated leadership of Dr. Howard,” ASSE President Michael W. Thompson, CSP, said in his letter to President Bush. “Dr. Howard has been instrumental in unleashing a wealth of talent at NIOSH and helping bring together the research and educational resources of NIOSH to the day-to-day practice of our members in workplaces across the nation.”

ASSE recently learned that CDC’s leadership will not renew Dr. Howard’s six-year appointment as NIOSH Director.

“We do not know why such a highly competent leader and administrator of an agency that has been, by any measure, a success in the eyes of our members and the entire safety and health community should not be reappointed,” Thompson wrote. “The very positive impact your Administration has had on occupational safety and health through Dr. Howard should be allowed to continue to the end and beyond this Administration. We can think of no more fitting legacy for your Administration’s success in providing leadership in occupational safety and health than by allowing Dr. Howard to continue in this role.”

In his letter Thompson reviewed a number of NIOSH accomplishments under Dr. Howard including:

1. Greatly improved integration of the safety and health community in setting NIOSH’s research agenda as evidenced by the significantly increased involvement of ASSE members and others in safety and health in the NORA agenda-setting process;
2. Leadership in addressing the safety and health risks of emerging technologies, most notably nanotechnology;
3. Increased accountability for NIOSH’s research programs by inviting examination through the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine, thereby assuring that this nation’s investment in occupational safety and health research is well placed; and,
4. Active outreach to safety and health practitioners and bringing the research results funded through NIOSH directly to the job site where ASSE members work.

To help companies protect their workers against fall-related accidents and stay compliant with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), safety industry publisher MANCOMM has developed The Complete OSHA Guide to Fall Protection (Product No. 36B-001). Like many MANCOMM reference works, this 140+ page, 8-1/2″ x 11″ volume is enhanced with RegLogic®, a colorful, graphical approach that makes reading and understanding regulations easier than ever.

This comprehensive guide provides pertinent fall-protection OSHA regulations from:
· Part 1910: General Industry
· Part 1915: Shipyard Employment
· Part 1917: Marine Terminals
· Part 1918: Longshoring
· Part 1926: Construction
· OSHA Letters of Interpretation

“This guide will do much to help companies protect their workers from fall related accidents,” says Benjamin Mangan, president and founder of MANCOMM. “When OSHA revealed the 10 most-violated OSHA standards, based on citations issued from October 1, 2004, through August 30, 2005, the third most cited standard was fall protection (with 5,504 violations). America’s workplaces need more fall protection education, and so we’ve created The Complete OSHA Guide to Fall Protection. There’s no other safety book like it.”

Can fall protection training save lives? The following case report from NIOSH, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, shows how a lack of safety awareness can lead to dire consequences.

While working inside a 172-foot-high concrete silo, a 27-year-old cement finisher lost his balance and fell from the scaffolding. His fall protection equipment, a safety lanyard, caught him—but then it snapped and he fell to his death, 160 feet below. When the lanyard was examined, burn damage was discovered at the point where it had snapped. This damage probably occurred during welding or burning operations from a previous job. Apparently, time had not been taken to examine the fall protection equipment.

“People often say ‘knowledge is power,’” Mangan says, “but there’s more to it than that. When it comes to fall protection, ‘knowledge is survival.’”

The guide is now available for $36.95. For more information, call (800) MANCOMM.

The American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) has recently expressed concern over the lawsuit filed by industry groups challenging the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) use of threshold limit values (TLVs) used to communicate the risk of exposure limits to chemical hazards through OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (HazCom).

ASSE is concerned that, if successful, this suit could prevent workers from obtaining the best available information on chemical exposure limits from employers under the HazCom standard by preventing the inclusion of TLVs on material safety data sheets (MSDSs), a practice that has existed for 25 years.

“The issue of setting appropriate exposure limits for dangerous chemicals being used in the workplace is a difficult one that calls for cooperative efforts,” said ASSE President Donald S. Jones, Sr., P.E., CSP. “We feel OSHA is trying to ensure that employees have the best scientific data available on exposure limits to certain hazardous chemicals. The lawsuit against OSHA’s use of TLVs in the HazCom Standard reinforces the need for all stakeholders to address updating workplace exposure limits, an effort that may well require direction from Congress as well as leadership from OSHA.”

TLVs are developed by the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). OSHA has long required inclusion of available ACGIH TLVs on MSDSs. Last January, ACGIH announced it had adopted TLVs for various substances including crystalline silica, iron oxide, propylene, and propylene dichloride. The lawsuit states that when ACGIH issued its revised TLVs, OSHA, by referencing them, wrongly amended its HazCom standard.

“Industry, safety, health and environmental professionals, worker organizations, OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and other stakeholders should work together to find a way to update exposure limits, instead of resorting to litigation,” Jones said. “The merits of the lawsuit aside, banning OSHA’s long standing practice of referencing ACGIH’s TLVs could deny workers and industry of critical data on exposure limits for a variety of hazardous chemicals. This cannot be in the best interest of workers, businesses and the public.”

Jones challenged the industry to join ASSE in urging Congress to pass legislation requiring OSHA to begin a negotiated rulemaking process to update exposure limits or provide legal protections against litigation so private organizations can achieve updated limits through the voluntary consensus-building process of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Either mechanism, Jones said, would allow any and all stakeholders to participate in the updating process, thereby helping to avoid the rancor, litigation and lack of results that has plagued this issue for so many years and increasing workplace safety.