FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
US Labor Department seeks more than $300,000 for Idaho whistleblower
Clearwater Paper Corp. fired employee who filed an OSHA safety complaint
SEATTLE — The U.S. Department of Labor filed a whistleblower complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho against Clearwater Paper Corp. in Lewiston, Idaho, for allegedly retaliating against an employee who raised workplace safety and health concerns.
The department's complaint alleges that a Clearwater Paper employee was fired in 2010 in retaliation for filing a safety complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Boise Area Office. The employee was first suspended and then fired soon after OSHA conducted an inspection to assess excessive exposure to red cedar dust at Clearwater Paper's sawmill in Lewiston. This facility was later sold in 2011.
"Raising a workplace safety and health concern is a courageous act of good citizenship," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Not a single worker should fear harassment, intimidation or a disciplinary action for contributing to a safe and healthy workplace. Employees have the right to contact OSHA without fear of retaliation."
The department is seeking reinstatement of the employee as well as payment of more than $300,000 in damages and fees, including back pay, compensatory damages, emotional distress damages and punitive damages.
Clearwater Paper manufactures consumer paper products.
OSHA enforces the whistleblower provision of the OSH Act and 21 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various securities, trucking, airline, nuclear, pipeline, environmental, public transportation, workplace safety and health, consumer product safety, health care reform and financial reform laws. Under these laws enacted by Congress, employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees who raise various protected concerns or provide protected information to the employer or to the government. Employees who believe that they have been retaliated against for engaging in protected conduct may file a complaint with the secretary of labor for an investigation by OSHA's Office of Whistleblower Protection Program.
Friday, November 1, 2013
Thursday, October 31, 2013
APARTMENT COMPLEX SETTLES DISCRIMINATION OF DISABLED WITH ANIMAL ASSISTANTS CASE
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, October 28, 2013
Justice Department Obtains $167,500 in Discrimination Settlement with Reno, Nev., Apartment Complex
The Justice Department announced today that the U.S. District Court of Nevada has approved a settlement in which the owners and operators of Rosewood Park Apartments, a 902 unit apartment complex in Reno, Nev., will pay $167,000 to resolve a lawsuit alleging discrimination against persons with disabilities who use assistance animals.
Under the agreement, the defendants in United States v. Rosewood Park LLC et al., will pay a total of $127,500 to a family that was not allowed to move into the complex because one of the members of the household used an assistance animal and to the Silver State Fair Housing Council, a non-profit Nevada organization that assisted the family and conducted testing to investigate the rental practices at Rosewood Park. The defendants will also pay an additional $25,000 to compensate any other persons harmed by the defendants’ discriminatory policies, who are identified through a process established by the agreement, and will pay $15,000 to the government in civil penalties. The agreement also requires that defendants adopt and maintain a new policy regarding assistance animals, provide non-discrimination training to their employees and agree to record keeping and monitoring requirements for the terms of the agreement. The agreement has been approved by the U.S. District Court of Nevada, and takes the form of a consent order that can be enforced by the court.
The department’s complaint had alleged that the owners, employees and management company of Rosewood Park Apartments violated the Fair Housing Act by limiting individuals with certain assistance animals to a particular section of Rosewood Park Apartments; subjecting such individuals to pet fees; requiring assistance animals to be licensed or certified; and barring companion or uncertified service dogs altogether. The case began when a family that had sought housing at Rosewood Park and the Silver State Fair Housing Council filed complaints with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD investigated the complaint, issued a charge of discrimination and referred the matter to the Department of Justice.
“The Fair Housing Act ensures that persons with disabilities searching for a home are protected from discrimination,” said Jocelyn Samuels, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department will continue to vigorously protect the civil rights of persons with disabilities in Nevada and across the country.”
“Persons who think they have been discriminated against in housing issues should not hesitate to file a report with HUD,” said U.S. Attorney Bogden. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office, as part of the U.S. Department of Justice, works with HUD to ensure that companies that are treating disabled persons unfairly are punished, and that they adopt policies to prevent further discrimination.”
“Assistance animals play a vital role in helping people with disabilities conduct everyday activities and fully enjoy their homes,” said Bryan Greene, HUD's Acting Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. “HUD and DOJ will continue to enforce the Fair Housing Act's protections and ensure that housing providers do not illegally limit assistance animals.”
Fighting illegal housing discrimination is a top priority of the Justice Department. The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Justice Department Obtains $167,500 in Discrimination Settlement with Reno, Nev., Apartment Complex
The Justice Department announced today that the U.S. District Court of Nevada has approved a settlement in which the owners and operators of Rosewood Park Apartments, a 902 unit apartment complex in Reno, Nev., will pay $167,000 to resolve a lawsuit alleging discrimination against persons with disabilities who use assistance animals.
Under the agreement, the defendants in United States v. Rosewood Park LLC et al., will pay a total of $127,500 to a family that was not allowed to move into the complex because one of the members of the household used an assistance animal and to the Silver State Fair Housing Council, a non-profit Nevada organization that assisted the family and conducted testing to investigate the rental practices at Rosewood Park. The defendants will also pay an additional $25,000 to compensate any other persons harmed by the defendants’ discriminatory policies, who are identified through a process established by the agreement, and will pay $15,000 to the government in civil penalties. The agreement also requires that defendants adopt and maintain a new policy regarding assistance animals, provide non-discrimination training to their employees and agree to record keeping and monitoring requirements for the terms of the agreement. The agreement has been approved by the U.S. District Court of Nevada, and takes the form of a consent order that can be enforced by the court.
The department’s complaint had alleged that the owners, employees and management company of Rosewood Park Apartments violated the Fair Housing Act by limiting individuals with certain assistance animals to a particular section of Rosewood Park Apartments; subjecting such individuals to pet fees; requiring assistance animals to be licensed or certified; and barring companion or uncertified service dogs altogether. The case began when a family that had sought housing at Rosewood Park and the Silver State Fair Housing Council filed complaints with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD investigated the complaint, issued a charge of discrimination and referred the matter to the Department of Justice.
“The Fair Housing Act ensures that persons with disabilities searching for a home are protected from discrimination,” said Jocelyn Samuels, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department will continue to vigorously protect the civil rights of persons with disabilities in Nevada and across the country.”
“Persons who think they have been discriminated against in housing issues should not hesitate to file a report with HUD,” said U.S. Attorney Bogden. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office, as part of the U.S. Department of Justice, works with HUD to ensure that companies that are treating disabled persons unfairly are punished, and that they adopt policies to prevent further discrimination.”
“Assistance animals play a vital role in helping people with disabilities conduct everyday activities and fully enjoy their homes,” said Bryan Greene, HUD's Acting Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. “HUD and DOJ will continue to enforce the Fair Housing Act's protections and ensure that housing providers do not illegally limit assistance animals.”
Fighting illegal housing discrimination is a top priority of the Justice Department. The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
OWNERS OF AMBULANCE COMPANY PLEAD GUILTY IN FRAUD SCHEME
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Owners and Supervisor of Ambulance Transportation Company Plead Guilty in Los Angeles for Role in Ambulance Fraud Scheme
The owners and supervisor of Alpha Ambulance Inc. (Alpha), a now-defunct Los Angeles-area ambulance transportation company, have pleaded guilty in connection with an ambulance fraud scheme.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California; Special Agent in Charge Glenn R. Ferry of the Los Angeles Region of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG); and Assistant Director in Charge Bill L. Lewis of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office made the announcement.
Alex Kapri, aka Alex Kapriyelov or Alexander Kapriyelov, 56; Aleksey Muratov, aka Russ Muratov, 32; and Danielle Hartsell Medina, 36, pleaded guilty on Oct. 28, 2013, before U.S. District Court Judge Audrey B. Collins in the Central District of California to conspiracy to commit health care fraud. They face a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison when they are sentenced on Feb. 24, 2014.
Kapri and Muratov were owners and operators of Alpha, an ambulance transportation company that operated in the greater Los Angeles area and that specialized in the provision of non-emergency ambulance transportation services to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries, primarily dialysis patients. Medina was employed by Alpha and ultimately supervised the training and education of its employees.
According to court documents, Kapri, Muratov and Medina knowingly provided non-emergency ambulance transportation services to Medicare beneficiaries whose medical condition at that time did not require those services. With Kapri’s knowledge, Muratov and Medina instructed certain Alpha employees to conceal the Medicare beneficiaries’ medical conditions by altering requisite paperwork and creating fraudulent reasons that justified, on paper, the transportation services. Based on these medically unnecessary transportation services, the defendants caused Alpha to submit false and fraudulent claims to Medicare.
Additionally, as the defendants were submitting false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, Medicare notified Alpha the company would be subject to a Medicare audit. In response to this notice, Muratov and Medina instructed Alpha employees – with Kapri’s knowledge – to alter requisite paperwork and create fraudulent reasons that justified, on paper, transportation services for the beneficiaries identified as the subject of Medicare’s audit.
From at least June 2008 through at least July 2012, Alpha submitted more than $49 million in claims for ambulance transportation services. As a result, Medicare paid Alpha more than $13 million for these claims, many of which were false and fraudulent.
The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under the supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. This case was prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Blanca Quintero and Alexander F. Porter and Assistant Chief O. Benton Curtis III.
Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged more than 1,500 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for more than $5 billion. In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Owners and Supervisor of Ambulance Transportation Company Plead Guilty in Los Angeles for Role in Ambulance Fraud Scheme
The owners and supervisor of Alpha Ambulance Inc. (Alpha), a now-defunct Los Angeles-area ambulance transportation company, have pleaded guilty in connection with an ambulance fraud scheme.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California; Special Agent in Charge Glenn R. Ferry of the Los Angeles Region of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG); and Assistant Director in Charge Bill L. Lewis of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office made the announcement.
Alex Kapri, aka Alex Kapriyelov or Alexander Kapriyelov, 56; Aleksey Muratov, aka Russ Muratov, 32; and Danielle Hartsell Medina, 36, pleaded guilty on Oct. 28, 2013, before U.S. District Court Judge Audrey B. Collins in the Central District of California to conspiracy to commit health care fraud. They face a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison when they are sentenced on Feb. 24, 2014.
Kapri and Muratov were owners and operators of Alpha, an ambulance transportation company that operated in the greater Los Angeles area and that specialized in the provision of non-emergency ambulance transportation services to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries, primarily dialysis patients. Medina was employed by Alpha and ultimately supervised the training and education of its employees.
According to court documents, Kapri, Muratov and Medina knowingly provided non-emergency ambulance transportation services to Medicare beneficiaries whose medical condition at that time did not require those services. With Kapri’s knowledge, Muratov and Medina instructed certain Alpha employees to conceal the Medicare beneficiaries’ medical conditions by altering requisite paperwork and creating fraudulent reasons that justified, on paper, the transportation services. Based on these medically unnecessary transportation services, the defendants caused Alpha to submit false and fraudulent claims to Medicare.
Additionally, as the defendants were submitting false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, Medicare notified Alpha the company would be subject to a Medicare audit. In response to this notice, Muratov and Medina instructed Alpha employees – with Kapri’s knowledge – to alter requisite paperwork and create fraudulent reasons that justified, on paper, transportation services for the beneficiaries identified as the subject of Medicare’s audit.
From at least June 2008 through at least July 2012, Alpha submitted more than $49 million in claims for ambulance transportation services. As a result, Medicare paid Alpha more than $13 million for these claims, many of which were false and fraudulent.
The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under the supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. This case was prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Blanca Quintero and Alexander F. Porter and Assistant Chief O. Benton Curtis III.
Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged more than 1,500 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for more than $5 billion. In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.
Monday, October 28, 2013
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION ISSUES FIRST PATTERN OF VIOLATION NOTICES
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
MSHA issues first POV notices under new rule
1 mine in Kentucky and 2 mines in West Virginia receive notices
ARLINGTON, Va. — The U.S. Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration announced today that three mining operations have been put on notice of a pattern of violations of mandatory health or safety standards under Section 104(e) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The POV screening is the first one conducted since MSHA's revised Pattern of Violations rule went into effect on March 25, 2013. These revisions improve MSHA's ability to act when it finds a pattern of violations.
The three mines that received POV notices are: Tram Energy LLC's Mine No. 1 in Floyd County, Ky.; Brody Mining LLC's Brody Mine No. 1 in Boone County, W.Va.; and Pocahontas Coal Company LLC's Affinity Mine in Raleigh County, W.Va. MSHA's review for POV covered all 14,600 of the nation's mines. The agency is still reviewing the injury records of several mines to determine if they should be considered for a POV notice based on this screening.
Under the Mine Act, MSHA is authorized to issue a POV notice to mine operators that demonstrate a disregard for the health and safety of miners through a pattern of significant and substantial violations. A POV notice, one of the agency's toughest enforcement actions, is reserved for the mines that pose the greatest risk to the safety of miners. An S&S violation is one that is reasonably likely to result in a reasonably serious injury or illness. The Mine Act requires mines that receive POV notices to be issued withdrawal orders — effectively ceasing operations — for all S&S violations. After no mine was placed on POV for the first 33 years after the Mine Act went into effect, these POV notices mark the third year in a row that MSHA has used this critical tool to protect miners from serious hazards.
"MSHA's new POV rule, which we will vigorously enforce, enhances protections for miners and shifts the responsibility for monitoring compliance and taking action to prevent POV enforcement actions to the operator," said Joseph A. Main, assistant secretary of labor for mine safety and health.
Tram Energy's Mine No. 1 received 120 S&S violations during the POV review period — more than half of those violations involved elevated levels of operator negligence. MSHA issued 40 closure orders at Tram Energy during the POV review period, the most of any mine in the country. The company has incurred approximately $170,000 in civil penalties since it began operating in 2012. All but $666 is unpaid and delinquent.
Brody Mining's Brody Mine No. 1 received 253 S&S violations during the review period. An MSHA audit of Brody Mining's records found that injuries of miners resulted in 1,757 lost work days at the mine, 367 of which were from eight lost-time injuries that Brody Mining failed to report to MSHA. The company was also audited during the 2012 POV screening process. In that audit, MSHA found 29 injuries Brody Mining failed to report and 724 unreported lost work days.
Pocahontas Coal Company's Affinity Mine received 124 S&S violations during the review period, a quarter of which MSHA cited as involving high negligence or reckless disregard for the health and safety of miners. Two miners died in separate accidents during the review period; the fatalities occurred within two weeks of each other and both involved scoops. Affinity Mine received 35 closure orders during the review period, the third highest in the country.
The new rule eliminated the requirement that MSHA consider only fully adjudicated orders in its POV review, shifted responsibility for monitoring compliance to the mine operator and mandated that operators submit corrective action programs to proactively address issues that could lead to a POV.
In 2010, MSHA identified 53 mines for review, issuing 17 potential POV notices and two POV notices. The October 2011 screening resulted in the review of 39 mines and the issuance of eight potential POV notices. In 2012, MSHA identified 20 mines and issued four potential POV notices. This year, MSHA identified nine mines for additional review. The improvements made in 2010 to the screening criteria were designed to help MSHA better identify the mines that present the greatest risks to miners, and the criteria has remained largely unchanged since they were implemented.
"The decrease in the number of operators meeting the POV criteria shows that the POV process is working — many operators are cleaning up their acts, even when MSHA is not looking over their shoulders," said Main.
MSHA issues first POV notices under new rule
1 mine in Kentucky and 2 mines in West Virginia receive notices
ARLINGTON, Va. — The U.S. Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration announced today that three mining operations have been put on notice of a pattern of violations of mandatory health or safety standards under Section 104(e) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The POV screening is the first one conducted since MSHA's revised Pattern of Violations rule went into effect on March 25, 2013. These revisions improve MSHA's ability to act when it finds a pattern of violations.
The three mines that received POV notices are: Tram Energy LLC's Mine No. 1 in Floyd County, Ky.; Brody Mining LLC's Brody Mine No. 1 in Boone County, W.Va.; and Pocahontas Coal Company LLC's Affinity Mine in Raleigh County, W.Va. MSHA's review for POV covered all 14,600 of the nation's mines. The agency is still reviewing the injury records of several mines to determine if they should be considered for a POV notice based on this screening.
Under the Mine Act, MSHA is authorized to issue a POV notice to mine operators that demonstrate a disregard for the health and safety of miners through a pattern of significant and substantial violations. A POV notice, one of the agency's toughest enforcement actions, is reserved for the mines that pose the greatest risk to the safety of miners. An S&S violation is one that is reasonably likely to result in a reasonably serious injury or illness. The Mine Act requires mines that receive POV notices to be issued withdrawal orders — effectively ceasing operations — for all S&S violations. After no mine was placed on POV for the first 33 years after the Mine Act went into effect, these POV notices mark the third year in a row that MSHA has used this critical tool to protect miners from serious hazards.
"MSHA's new POV rule, which we will vigorously enforce, enhances protections for miners and shifts the responsibility for monitoring compliance and taking action to prevent POV enforcement actions to the operator," said Joseph A. Main, assistant secretary of labor for mine safety and health.
Tram Energy's Mine No. 1 received 120 S&S violations during the POV review period — more than half of those violations involved elevated levels of operator negligence. MSHA issued 40 closure orders at Tram Energy during the POV review period, the most of any mine in the country. The company has incurred approximately $170,000 in civil penalties since it began operating in 2012. All but $666 is unpaid and delinquent.
Brody Mining's Brody Mine No. 1 received 253 S&S violations during the review period. An MSHA audit of Brody Mining's records found that injuries of miners resulted in 1,757 lost work days at the mine, 367 of which were from eight lost-time injuries that Brody Mining failed to report to MSHA. The company was also audited during the 2012 POV screening process. In that audit, MSHA found 29 injuries Brody Mining failed to report and 724 unreported lost work days.
Pocahontas Coal Company's Affinity Mine received 124 S&S violations during the review period, a quarter of which MSHA cited as involving high negligence or reckless disregard for the health and safety of miners. Two miners died in separate accidents during the review period; the fatalities occurred within two weeks of each other and both involved scoops. Affinity Mine received 35 closure orders during the review period, the third highest in the country.
The new rule eliminated the requirement that MSHA consider only fully adjudicated orders in its POV review, shifted responsibility for monitoring compliance to the mine operator and mandated that operators submit corrective action programs to proactively address issues that could lead to a POV.
In 2010, MSHA identified 53 mines for review, issuing 17 potential POV notices and two POV notices. The October 2011 screening resulted in the review of 39 mines and the issuance of eight potential POV notices. In 2012, MSHA identified 20 mines and issued four potential POV notices. This year, MSHA identified nine mines for additional review. The improvements made in 2010 to the screening criteria were designed to help MSHA better identify the mines that present the greatest risks to miners, and the criteria has remained largely unchanged since they were implemented.
"The decrease in the number of operators meeting the POV criteria shows that the POV process is working — many operators are cleaning up their acts, even when MSHA is not looking over their shoulders," said Main.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
OSHA ANNOUNCES NEW RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO PROTECT WORKERS FROM HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS
FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
OSHA releases new resources to better protect workers from hazardous chemicals
WASHINGTON — Each year in the United States, tens of thousands of workers are made sick or die from occupational exposures to the thousands of hazardous chemicals that are used in workplaces every day. The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration today launched two new web resources to assist companies with keeping their workers safe.
While many chemicals are suspected of being harmful, OSHA's exposure standards are out-of-date and inadequately protective for the small number of chemicals that are regulated in the workplace. The first resource OSHA has created is a toolkit to identify safer chemicals that can be used in place of more hazardous ones. This toolkit walks employers and workers step-by-step through information, methods, tools and guidance to either eliminate hazardous chemicals or make informed substitution decisions in the workplace by finding a safer chemical, material, product or process. The toolkit is available at http://www.osha.gov/dsg/safer_chemicals/index.html.
"We know that the most efficient and effective way to protect workers from hazardous chemicals is by eliminating or replacing those chemicals with safer alternatives whenever possible," said Dr. David Michaels, assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health.
OSHA also created another new web resource: the Annotated Permissible Exposure Limits, or annotated PEL tables, which will enable employers to voluntarily adopt newer, more protective workplace exposure limits. OSHA's PELs set mandatory limits on the amount or concentration of a substance in the air to protect workers against the health effects of certain hazardous chemicals; and OSHA will continue to enforce those mandatory PELs. Since OSHA's adoption of the majority of its PELs more than 40 years ago, new scientific data, industrial experience and developments in technology clearly indicate that in many instances these mandatory limits are not sufficiently protective of workers' health.
"There is no question that many of OSHA's chemical standards are not adequately protective," Michaels said. "I advise employers, who want to ensure that their workplaces are safe, to utilize the occupational exposure limits on these annotated tables, since simply complying with OSHA's antiquated PELs will not guarantee that workers will be safe."
The annotated PEL tables provide a side-by-side comparison of OSHA PELs for general industry to the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health PELs, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health recommended exposure limits, and American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienist threshold limit values. They offer an easily accessible reference source for up-to-date workplace exposure limits, which are available at http://www.osha.gov/dsg/annotated-pels/index.html.
OSHA releases new resources to better protect workers from hazardous chemicals
WASHINGTON — Each year in the United States, tens of thousands of workers are made sick or die from occupational exposures to the thousands of hazardous chemicals that are used in workplaces every day. The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration today launched two new web resources to assist companies with keeping their workers safe.
While many chemicals are suspected of being harmful, OSHA's exposure standards are out-of-date and inadequately protective for the small number of chemicals that are regulated in the workplace. The first resource OSHA has created is a toolkit to identify safer chemicals that can be used in place of more hazardous ones. This toolkit walks employers and workers step-by-step through information, methods, tools and guidance to either eliminate hazardous chemicals or make informed substitution decisions in the workplace by finding a safer chemical, material, product or process. The toolkit is available at http://www.osha.gov/dsg/safer_chemicals/index.html.
"We know that the most efficient and effective way to protect workers from hazardous chemicals is by eliminating or replacing those chemicals with safer alternatives whenever possible," said Dr. David Michaels, assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health.
OSHA also created another new web resource: the Annotated Permissible Exposure Limits, or annotated PEL tables, which will enable employers to voluntarily adopt newer, more protective workplace exposure limits. OSHA's PELs set mandatory limits on the amount or concentration of a substance in the air to protect workers against the health effects of certain hazardous chemicals; and OSHA will continue to enforce those mandatory PELs. Since OSHA's adoption of the majority of its PELs more than 40 years ago, new scientific data, industrial experience and developments in technology clearly indicate that in many instances these mandatory limits are not sufficiently protective of workers' health.
"There is no question that many of OSHA's chemical standards are not adequately protective," Michaels said. "I advise employers, who want to ensure that their workplaces are safe, to utilize the occupational exposure limits on these annotated tables, since simply complying with OSHA's antiquated PELs will not guarantee that workers will be safe."
The annotated PEL tables provide a side-by-side comparison of OSHA PELs for general industry to the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health PELs, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health recommended exposure limits, and American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienist threshold limit values. They offer an easily accessible reference source for up-to-date workplace exposure limits, which are available at http://www.osha.gov/dsg/annotated-pels/index.html.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)