In August, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it is considering revisiting the Process Safety Management (PSM) standard. This column summarizes why OSHA is thinking of amending the standard and what you can do to engage in the process.

The Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) is, by its very nature, perennially a work in progress. The US is committed to global harmonisation in classifying chemical hazards, and the US Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha) 2012 incorporation of the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of classification and labelling of chemicals into the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) was a big step forward in achieving global harmonisation. The road is long, however, and the administration recognises much work remains to be done. This article reports on Osha's efforts to continue the harmonisation process.

In the Trump Administration’s Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (Regulatory Agenda) issued on October 17, 2018, the US Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published a Proposed Rule Stage item titled, “Update to the Hazard Communication Standard,” RIN 1218-AC93 (OSHA, 2018), and scheduled the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to be issued by March, 2019. This could be an important regulatory development for all entities subject to Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) requirements, which is just about everyone. This column explains why this development is significant.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced on March 2, 2018, that it will begin enforcing certain requirements of the 2017 final rule on occupational exposure to beryllium in general industry, construction, and shipyards on May 11, 2018, and that it will delay enforcement of certain other standards. This column discusses the final rule and OSHA’s recent enforcement policy. 

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published a Federal Register notice on February 10, 2017, inviting comment on a proposed information collection plan, "Survey of Engineered Nanomaterial Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Practices." The goal of the project is to assess the relevance and impact of NIOSH's contribution to guidelines and risk mitigation practices for safe handling of engineered nanomaterials in the workplace. The intended use of the data is to inform NIOSH's research agenda to enhance its relevance and impact on worker safety and health in the context of engineered nanomaterials. 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released on December 20, 2016, a white paper entitled Sustainability in the Workplace: A New Approach for Advancing Worker Safety and Health. See https://www.osha.gov/sustainability/docs/OSHA_sustainability_paper.pdf The paper highlights the importance of including worker safety and health in the growing movement toward sustainability and corporate responsibility. According to the paper, research on sustainability does not include occupational safety and health.

On March 25, 2016, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued its long-awaited revised standards for occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica (81 Fed. Reg. 16286). OSHA issued two separate standards — one for general industry and maritime, and the other for the construction industry — to tailor requirements to the unique circumstances found in these sectors. The rule impacts more than 2.3-million American workers across a wide spectrum of industries, according to OSHA, and is expected to save the lives of more than 600 workers per year. Its implementation will likely have broad logistical and cost implications for many employers in numerous industry sectors. This article provides highlights of the final rule.

On February 16, 2016, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released for public comment its “Guidance on Data Evaluation for Weight of Evidence Determination.” The document aims to help employers consider all available information when classifying hazardous chemicals for labeling and safety data sheet (SDS) completion purposes. Because of the critical importance of satisfying these regulatory obligations correctly, understanding the Guidance is essential.

On October 1, 2015, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released a revised Field Operations Manual (FOM), Directive Number CPL 02-00-159, available here. The FOM aims to “provide OSHA offices, State Plan programs and federal agencies with policy and procedures concerning the enforcement of occupational safety and health standards.” Because OSHA can impose higher penalties as a result of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, the document is a must-read for companies subject to OSHA enforcement.

On July 20, 2015, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued OSHA Directive Number CPL 02-02-079. The Directive is intended to establish “policies and procedures to ensure uniform enforcement of the Hazard Communication standard” (HCS 2012).

On May 29, 2015, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published the “Interim Enforcement Guidance for Hazard Communication 2012 (HCS 2012) June 1, 2015 Effective Date” (Interim Guidance). This supplements the February 9, 2015, “Enforcement Guidance for the Hazard Communication Standard’s (HCS) June 1, 2015 Effective Date” (Enforcement Guidance). The Interim Guidance clarifies specific points to manufacturers, importers, and distributors on OSHA’s HCS enforcement strategy.

On July 31, 2014, EPA published a Request for Information (RFI) seeking information and data on potential revisions to its Clean Air Act (CAA) Risk Management Program (RMP) regulations and related programs. In the RFI, EPA asks for information on specific regulatory elements and on Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Process Safety Management (PSM) approaches, the public and environmental health and safety risks they address, and the costs and burdens they may impose. This column explains why this RFI is critically important to the RMP and PSM programs and thus to Pollution Engineering readers.

Chemical plant safety is once again in the limelight due to some high profile and very public catastrophes. On January 3, 2014, a federal working group created by the Obama administration’s Executive Order (EO) 13650 issued a set of preliminary options intended to improve chemical plant safety and security. This is a priority topic commanding considerable attention and readers should be aware of and engaged in these developments. This column explains why.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently proposed revisions to the injury and illness reporting and recordkeeping requirements for employers. The proposal would increase workplace safety and health through improved tracking of workplace injuries and illnesses.

In August 2013, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) proposed a controversial rule lowering the 40-year-old permissible exposure limits (PEL) for crystalline silica particles. This is big news from an agency from that we hear little.

Manufacturers working with nanoscale materials will be pleased to know that the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently published a fact sheet entitled "Working Safely with Nanomaterials". This document is a welcome addition to the widely available literature on managing prudently workplace exposures to nanomaterials.

After much deliberation, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced in March that it has revised the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS), aligning it with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). The final HCS rule, which becomes effective in May, will be implemented in various phases with full implementation by 2016.

In March, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued its revised final Hazard Communication Standard (HCS), aligning it with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). Here are some key aspects of the final rule, which will be fully implemented by 2016.

For the manufacturing work force, selecting and requiring the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is one of the most important elements of assuring a safe and healthful work environment. What PPE to wear, who pays for it and how to determine which is the right PPE to protect against a known hazard in the workplace are all critically important issues, both from the perspective of an employee’s personal safety and an employer’s freedom from allegations of non-compliance. Eliminating the guesswork and ensuring compliance in this area just became a bit easier, as on Feb. 15, 2011, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a revised directive that provides enforcement guidance on determining whether employers have complied with OSHA’s PPE standards. The Enforcement Guidance for Personal Protective Equipment in General Industry, CPL 02-01-050, is the latest word from OSHA on PPE, and is a must read for employers and employees alike.

For the manufacturing work force, selecting and requiring the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is one of the most important elements of assuring a safe and healthful work environment. What PPE to wear, who pays for it and how to determine which is the right PPE to protect against a known hazard in the workplace are all critically important issues, both from the perspective of an employee’s personal safety and an employer’s freedom from allegations of non-compliance. Eliminating the guesswork and ensuring compliance in this area just became a bit easier, as on Feb. 15, 2011, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a revised directive that provides enforcement guidance on determining whether employers have complied with OSHA’s PPE standards. The Enforcement Guidance for Personal Protective Equipment in General Industry, CPL 02-01-050, is the latest word from OSHA on PPE, and is a must read for employers and employees alike.

On February 15, 2011, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a revised directive that provides enforcement guidance on determining whether employers have complied with OSHA's personal protective equipment (PPE) standards. The Enforcement Guidance for Personal Protective Equipment in General Industry, CPL 02-01-050, is the latest word from OSHA on PPE, and an important document for employers and employees alike.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is tackling a major source of industrial injuries -- slips, trips and falls on workplace surfaces. On May 24, OSHA proposed significant revisions to Subparts D and I of the general industry standards dealing with walking-working surfaces and personal protective equipment (PPE), respectively. This column outlines the reasons why OSHA believes changes are needed to protect workers, and key revisions to these standards.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) began the Herculean task of aligning the U.S.'s Hazardous Communication Standard (HCS) with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) in September 2009. GHS provides harmonized criteria for classifying chemicals according to their health and physical hazards, and specifies hazard communication elements for labeling and creating safety data sheets (SDS).

With little fanfare, the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has rolled out its much anticipated “PSM Covered Chemical Facilities National Emphasis Program.” This one-year pilot program, launched in July 2009, focuses on facilities’ compliance with the OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) standard,1 which aims to blunt the hazard of fires or explosions resulting from releases of “highly hazardous chemicals.” This “Washington Watch” column reviews the new pilot program and assesses the implications of the program for regulated facilities.