Once something is a "recognized hazard" OSHA can use General Duty and refer to industry standards such as NFPA. Coming from the entertainment industry, we all know this. There is no rule in OSHA fall protection standards about hooking someone up to an airplane wire and flying them over an audience. However, hitting the ground at a rapid rate of speed is a "recognized hazard." So Spiderman was cited.
They use our own industry standards for theatrical fog and special effects, for rigging lights, etc., and when Alec Baldwin shot the cinematographer, the NMOSHA cited our own film industry Bulletin 10 gun safety rules.
This Phoenix lab is not in production, it does analysis of samples. So it is going to be under the Lab standard. And everything else that is recognized as a potential hazard is under General Duty and they can find a reputable industry or technical group standard to cite.
It's why I don't teach OSHA 10 and set up my own courses. The OSHA regs are NEVER enough. All of the applicable standards need to be covered.
And if you do expert witness in personal injury from such workplace accidents (and don't kid yourself thinking that we can't sue because we have to accept workers' comp), it is really tough to get an OSHA rule into evidence because the judge will point out this is not an OSHA hearing. But you can introduce any applicable industry standard without objection.
Get thee a membership in NFPA, ASTM, ASHRAE, or any other standard's organization that mucks about in your business and keep up. If you get on the right committees, you will not lose much time voting online, and you can score the new standards without additional cost.
Monona
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry J. Elston <helston**At_Symbol_Here**MIDWESTCHEMSAFETY.COM>
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU
Sent: Fri, Sep 23, 2022 8:23 am
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] OSHA fines Phoenix Labs nearly $1M for safety violations
Ralph et al.:
I'm still trying to digest the 33 page citation. The Wetterhan citation was long before OSHA increased their fine structure. I think that increase was north of 75%, so the proposed Dartmouth fine would be ca $24,000 in today's numbers.
While I've only made one not-so-critical pass through the citation, I've noticed a few things.
1. The first violation was made under the General Duty Clause and cites other standards that are not incorporated by reference in the OSHA standards. GDC violations without a specific standard are hard to stick, should the lab choose to fight it.
2. The Lab Standard portion of the citation reminds us that the Lab Standard is an exposure standard, nothing more. It is not a process standard.
3. Other consensus standards, such as NFPA, CGA, ANSI, etc. are important to the all-around lab safety package. The lab safety professional needs to be aware of the consensus standards, even if they are not incorporated by reference into OSHA. I've been preaching that for a long, long time.
4. The Lab Safety professional needs to be aware of all the other OSHA general industry standards as well - like electrical safety (one of the citations). That too, I have preached for a long time.
It will be a learning experience for us all, especially if Phoenix decides to fight it.
H
> >Does anyone know if this is the largest OSHA fine proposed against a lab?
Such a reasonable question, with such an inscrutable answer.
Rather than using the “largest ever” approach, perhaps a response with more context would be more valuable:
- The fine federal OSHA proposed against Dartmouth in the Wetterhahn fatality case was $13,500. OSHA and Dartmouth settled on $9000 as the final penalty.
https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/establishment.inspection_detail?id=300441557
- The fine California OSHA proposed against UCLA in the Sangi fatality case was $31,875. I see reports that UCLA later appealed this fine, but I don’t see any information as to whether those fines were reduced as a result. The appeals were designed to avoid follow up liability rather than to save money.
https://www.labmanager.com/news/ucla-appeals-citations-20357
There are reports that if the UC System had been criminally convicted of the charges against it before the reached a settlement agreement, the fines could have been in the $4,500,000 range. The System's legal fees were in that range by themselves.
https://cen.acs.org/safety/lab-safety/Charges-dropped-against-UCLA-chemistry/96/web/2018/09
So the close to $1M number is very different from precedents from other lab citations, but OSHA has revised its penalty policy several times over the years to reflect inflation and increase its deterrence value, so “highest ever” compares apples to oranges.
Try fitting all that context into a headline ;).
- Ralph
Ralph Stuart, CIH, CCHO
ralph**At_Symbol_Here**rstuartcih.org
---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter @acsdchas
--
+++++++
Harry J. Elston, Ph.D., CIH, PMP
Principal, Midwest Chemical Safety, LLC
---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at
membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter @acsdchas
---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at
membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter @acsdchas
