Back to Contents

Ergonomics rules repealed

In the second half of a one-two punch, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted on March 6 to overturn the Ergonomics Program Standard, 29 CFR 1910.900. The House followed the lead taken by the Senate less than 24 hours earlier. President Bush signed this legislation on March 20.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published its Final Ergonomics Program Standard in the Nov. 14, 2000 Federal Register, eight years after announcing plans to establish rules on workplace ergonomics. The rule went into effect on Jan. 16 of this year. OSHA had estimated that the rules would have prevented 4.6 million musculoskeletal disorders and saved businesses $9.1 billion annually during the first 10 years. The agency also estimated compliance would cost businesses $4.5 billion annually.

Business organizations argued the regulations were too broad and would have imposed far higher costs—as much as $100 billion a year.

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao said she would like to “pursue a comprehensive approach to ergonomics,” which might include issuing a new rule that reflects the concerns of critics.

The House and Senate used the Congressional Review Act of 1996, an unusual legislative weapon, to repeal the rules. The act allows Congress to rescind regulations that are less than 60 days old.

Back to Contents

Needle Stick Act becomes law, OSHA to revise standard

On April 18, 2001, the Needle Stick Safety and Prevention Act went into effect. The Act directs the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to revise the Bloodborne Pathogen Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1030, in accordance with specific language included in the Act.

The provisions were based on the Agency’s determination that a combination of engineering and work practice controls, personal protective equipment (PPE), training, medical surveillance, hepatitis B vaccination, signs and labels and other requirements would minimize the risk of disease transmission.

The primary agents of concern in current occupational settings are HIV, Hepatitis B virus and Hepatitis C virus. Currently the estimates of how many health care workers incur percutaneous injuries (penetrations of the skin) involving contaminated sharps are 590,164 per year.

New requirements of this rule are as follows:

• Employers must solicit input from employees responsible for direct patient care in the identification, evaluation and selection of engineering and work practice controls.
• Certain employers must establish and maintain a log of percutaneous injuries from contaminated sharps.

For more information on the revised standard and needle stick safety, go to OSHA’s Web site: www.osha-slc.gov/needlesticks/index.html.

Back to Contents

Revised record keeping rule finalized

OSHA’s existing record keeping requirements have been in place since 1971 and have long been criticized as complicated and confusing. The revised rule is designed to produce better information about occupational injuries and illnesses while simplifying the overall record keeping system for employers. The rule will also better protect employees’ privacy. Additionally, recently passed legislation requires OSHA to address and make provisions for the recording of needlestick/sharps injuries.

The final rule becomes effective on Jan. 1, 2002. OSHA published the rule in the Federal Register on Jan. 19, 2001 to give employers ample time to learn the new requirements and revise computer systems they may be using for recordkeeping. Like the former rule, employers with 10 or fewer employees are exempt from most requirements of the new rule, except in the case of reporting the hospitalization of three or more employees or a fatality to OSHA within eight hours.

The revised recordkeeping standard still requires employers to track, record and report workplace injuries and illnesses, but makes it easier for employers to successfully meet the requirements of this standard.

The complete regulation can be found in the Federal Register dated Jan. 19, 2001, pages 5916-6135 or online at www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html. Parts affected are CFR 29 part 1904 and 1952.

Some notable changes in the revised record keeping rule:

1. OSHA 300 form: log of work-related injuries and illnesses; simplified and printed on smaller, legal-sized paper 
2. OSHA 300A form: summary of work-related injuries and illnesses; a separate form updated to make it easier to calculate incidence rates 
3. OSHA 301 form: injury and illness incident report

• OSHA 301 incident report form, or an equivalent form, must be completed for each entry on the OSHA 300 log 
  
• One set of criteria will be used to record both work-related injuries and illnesses 
  
• New definitions of medical treatment, first aid and restricted work to simplify recording decisions 
  
• A significant degree of aggravation must exist before a pre-existing injury or illness becomes recordable 
  
• Recording of a light duty or restricted case is clarified 
  
• All needlestick and sharps injuries must be recorded
  
• All standard threshold shift (STS) hearing loss must be recorded in the separate column of the OSHA 300 log 
  
• All Musculoskeletal Disorders must be recorded in the separate column of the OSHA 300 log 
• All cases of tuberculosis transmission must be recorded 
  
• Eliminate the term “lost workdays” and replace with “days away” or “days restricted”; days counted will rely on calendar days (including weekends and holidays) not just workdays 
  
• Employers must establish a procedure for employees to report injuries and illnesses and tell them how to report 
  
• Protect employee privacy by not entering an individual’s name on Form 300 for certain types of injuries/illnesses, not describing the nature of sensitive injuries that may reveal the identity of the individual, only giving access to OSHA 301 forms that contain no personal identifiers, and removing employees’ names before providing the data to persons not provided access rights under this rule 
  
• Annual summary (OSHA form 300A) must be posted for three months from Feb. 1 to April 30 of each year along with certification by a company executive

Back to Contents

New ANSI standard for high-vis apparel

On June 1, 1999, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Safety Equipment Institute (ISEA) approved ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, Standard for High-Visibility Safety Apparel. The standard sets requirements for high visibility apparel to increase conspicuity of the wearer in hazardous conditions.

This voluntary standard responds to concerns about the protection of workers exposed to low-visibility workplace hazards, such as being struck by passing vehicles or other types of moving equipment because they can’t be seen. The standard provides guidelines for road construction employees, railway and utility workers, law enforcement and emergency response personnel, and survey and airport ground crews.

Three classes of high-visibility apparel are specified. Class 3 apparel has the most retroreflective material and offers the greatest visibility to the wearer against complex backgrounds. Class 2 apparel provides superior visibility for wearers and contains more retroreflective material than Class 1. Three different colors—fluorescent yellow-green, fluorescent orange-red and fluorescent red— are defined for background and retroreflective materials.

The standard includes performance requirements for color, retroreflection and configuration of materials. Additional performance requirements for physical properties and garment care are also included.

A copy of the standard may be obtained from the ISEA Web site at www.safetycentral.org/isea or by calling ISEA at 703-525-1695.

Back to Contents

Regular testing keeps fire alarms functioning properly

Periodic testing helps ensure a fire alarm system functions properly. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) outlines acceptable fire alarm system and accessory equipment test methods in NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm Code.

When a system is installed, an acceptance test is run. This acceptance test is the baseline level of quality for a fire alarm system. To ensure continued reliability of a fire alarm system, periodic testing needs to be performed. Table 7-2.2 of NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm Code, outlines acceptable test methods to be used when testing alarm systems.

The code requires that system smoke detectors “be tested in place to ensure smoke entry into the sensing chamber and an alarm response. Testing with smoke or listed aerosol approved by the manufacturer shall be permitted as acceptable test methods.

Other methods approved by the manufacturer that ensure smoke entry into the sensing chamber shall be permitted.”

Regarding suppression systems, according to NFPA 72, “testing shall be performed in accordance with the schedules in Chapter 7 or more often if required by the authority having jurisdiction . . . Table 7-3.2 shall apply.” There is an exception for inaccessible equipment or devices, which can be tested during scheduled shutdown periods as long as the authority having jurisdiction approves.

Table 7-3.1 and 7-3.2 provide the test frequencies for visual inspection and physical testing, respectively. Most initiating devices must be inspected semi-annually by a qualified person. Radiant energy-sensing fire detectors, supervisory signal devices and water flow devices must be inspected quarterly. A qualified person must physically test all initiating devices annually. In addition, that person must also physically test radiant energy-sensing fire detectors semiannually, supervisory signal devices quarterly and water flow and tamper switches semiannually.

Any time a fire alarm system is modified or added, reacceptance testing must be performed. Section 7-1.6.2.1 of NFPA 72 states that “Reacceptance testing shall be performed after any of the following added or deleted system components; any modification, repair or adjustment to system hardware or wiring; and any change to site-specific software.”

Back to Contents

Use clothing, repellents to fight off bugs

Warmer temperatures are a sure sign that summer is on the way. And with the warmer temperatures come those pesky, nuisance insects to ruin your outdoor activities. A single acre of land can easily accommodate more than 400 million insects that can sting, bite, chew or just generally annoy us enough to want to stay indoors.

Insects such as hornets, bees and fire ants use stingers, which penetrate the skin and inject venom. Bites from mosquitoes and black flies initially cause itching, but it’s the insect’s saliva that’s the main irritant. The saliva is highly acidic and can create swelling, welts and severe itching. Chiggers are chewers who tear small pieces of skin and secrete a liquid that dissolves skin cells. A close encounter with chiggers will leave you with one of the most itchy and painful of all insect wounds.

There are two options to fight off these insects. The first approach is to dress in loose pants and long-sleeved shirts. Mosquito netting is also a good idea for covering the face and neck. This full-body covering keeps insects away from the skin and prevents bites or stings.

A second option is to use insect repellent. The most commonly used— and effective—repellents generally contain DEET (N, N-diethyl-m-toluamide), which was developed in 1946 by the U.S. military and made available to the public in 1957.

Although DEET works well as a repellent, it does have some shortcomings. In 1961, the New England Journal of Medicine reported a study on the effects of continuous exposure to DEET. The study indicated that DEET penetrated the skin and entered the bloodstream easily, and should therefore be used with caution. It found that some children generously treated with DEET for several weeks experienced seizures, convulsions and developed toxic encephalopathy. Adults, the study reported, experienced confusion, irritability, insomnia and other neurological problems when exposed to high levels of DEET.

To prevent adverse reactions, it’s recommended that DEET-based products be applied sparingly or over clothing rather than directly on the skin. Another option is using products that have low concentrations of DEET. Even with its shortfalls, an estimated 200 million people use DEET-based products and adverse reactions are extremely rare.

Alternatives to DEET-based repellents are available. A natural oil gaining popularity is lemon-scented citronella, which is derived from an Asian grass. Citronella itself evaporates quickly, reducing its effectiveness. However, formulations have been created to avoid this problem.

A little planning and a few precautions can make a big difference when spending time outside this summer. So whether it’s work or relaxation, by dressing appropriately and having the right insect repellents on hand, you can be a little more comfortable outdoors.

Back to Contents

Hydrogen peroxide: health effects and first aid

This is second in a two-part feature on hydrogen peroxide. A previous issue of TECHlines (Vol. 8 Issue I) discussed the properties of hydrogen peroxide and personal protective equipment.

Industrial-grade hydrogen peroxide (concentrations of 8–27.5 percent) is not a systematic poison, but contact with it can be irritating. Here is what to watch out for and what to do if contact occurs.

Health effects

The following are symptoms of exposure to industrial grade hydrogen peroxide:

Inhalation: Vapors are corrosive and irritating to the respiratory tract. Inhalation of the mist may burn the mucous membranes.

Ingestion: Corrosive and irritating to the mouth, throat and abdomen. Large doses may cause symptoms like abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhea, as well as blistering or tissue destruction.

Skin contact: Corrosive and irritating. Symptoms such as redness, pain and severe burn can occur. 

Eye contact: Vapors are very corrosive and irritating to the eyes. Symptoms include pain, redness and blurred vision.

First aid measures

Should an individual contact hydrogen peroxide, the following first aid measures should be followed:

Inhalation: Remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Seek medical attention immediately. 

Ingestion: Do not induce vomiting. Give large quantities of water. Seek medical attention immediately. 

Skin contact: Immediately flush skin with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes, while removing contaminated clothing and shoes. Seek medical attention immediately. 

Eye contact: Immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes, lifting lower and upper eyelids occasionally. Seek medical attention immediately.

For more information on safe handling practices for hydrogen peroxide, refer to your material safety data sheet (MSDS) or contact your chemical supplier.

Back to Contents

Respirator cartridge change-out schedules available online

Revisions to the OSHA standard regarding respirator cartridge change-out became effective April 8, 1998 and require that cartridges be changed on an employer-controlled schedule.

29 CFR 1910.134(d)(3)(B)(2) states, “If there is no ESLI [end of service life indicator] appropriate for conditions in the employer’s workplace, the employer implements a change schedule for canisters and cartridges based on objective information or data that will ensure the canisters are changed before the end of their service life.”

Simply stated, if the chemical cartridges being used do not have an indicator that changes color when it’s time to replace them, a change-out schedule needs to be developed. Since very few cartridges have this indicator, virtually all respirator users need to develop these schedules.

There are three basic ways to develop change-out schedules: use mathematical models, conduct experimental tests or use the manufacturer’s recommendations. Using the manufacturer’s recommendations is not as reliable as conducting experimental tests and the manufacturer may not have data on your exact situation. But for many people, this is the easiest way. Many manufacturers have cartridge information on their Web sites to aid in developing schedules. Some manufacturers have computer programs that run through the mathematical formulas or have data based on testing.

Other manufacturers, such as Moldex, suggest their customers look at the Advisor Genius. The Advisor Genius is a program developed by OSHA that runs through a mathematical formula to produce a change-out schedule. This program is available online at
www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/respiratory_ advisor/advisor_genius_wood/advisor_genius.html.

The other two methods of developing change-out schedules—con-ducting your own tests or using mathematical formulas—are alternatives that many companies decide to use. Many times, one of these two methods will be the only alternative if the respirator manufacturer doesn’t have data on the chemicals being used. Fortunately, OSHA’s Web site also has information on these two methods. Visit 
www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/respiratory_advisor/change_schedule.html.

Although it is no longer acceptable to use the warning properties of the chemicals as the only means of determining when to change cartridges, if odor is detected at any time, the cartridges must be replaced.

Back to Contents

Video display terminals cause safety concerns

With employees spending more time in front of video display terminals (VDTs), issues concerning VDT safety have arisen. Currently, OSHA does not have any standards that apply specifically to VDTs or to extreme low frequency electric and magnetic field exposure. OSHA does, however, have standards to protect employees against overexposures to radiation. They also offer suggestions to improve the comfort of VDT users.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency and others have measured radiation emitted by VDTs. The tests show that levels for all types of radiation are below those allowed in current standards. In fact, some measurements show radiation levels so low that they cannot be distinguished from general environmental radiation, or background radiation.

Sometimes a video display operator may encounter physical discomforts, such as eye fatigue and irritation, blurred vision, headaches or dizziness. Others may experience pain or stiffness in the neck, shoulders or back. Changing some of the physical and environmental conditions can alleviate these problems.

A workstation should provide the operator with maximum flexibility to adjust sitting position, arm and shoulder position and height of work surfaces. A workstation should give the operator flexibility to reach, use and observe the screen, keyboard and the document. Guidance should be provided to employees regarding adjustments of the chair, work surface and computer.

For more information on general video display terminal workstation guidelines, see the OSHA Fact Sheet at 
www.osha-slc.gov/OshDoc/Fact_data/FSNO95-24.html.

 Back to Contents

NIOSH works to make farms safer for kids

Farming is one of the most dangerous industries in the United States, according to statistics from the National Safety Council. Children are exposed to many of the same hazards as adults on farms, but they are far less capable of understanding those hazards. Based on the amount of time spent in farm-related activities, statistics show that children are more likely to be injured or killed than adults.

Approximately 1.5 million children under the age of 20 work or have a presence on farms. These children are exposed to numerous hazards, including tractors, farm implements and machinery, pesticides and livestock. Each year, approximately 33,000 children under the age of 20 are seriously injured on farms and more than 100 are killed. Recent data from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) indicates that adolescent agricultural fatalities are nearly 2.5 times higher than the rate for overall U.S. occupational fatalities.

In 1996, a National Action Plan entitled “Children and Agriculture: Opportunities for Safety and Health” was instituted. The goal of this plan was to reduce agricultural injuries to children younger than 18 years old. The action plan achieved congressional support and was implemented by NIOSH. NIOSH is working extensively with numerous agencies in the safety, health and agricultural communities to prevent injury and death among young people in agriculture.

For information on NIOSH’s efforts to curb agricultural injuries and fatalities among children, call 1-800-35-NIOSH or visit its Web site at www.cdc.gov/niosh/agtopics.html. The National Children’s Center for Rural and Agricultural Health and Safety is funded by NIOSH and the Maternal Child Health Bureau and has information available online at:
research.marshfieldclinic.org/children/. Additional Web sites of interest include North American Guidelines for Children’s Agricultural Task at www.nagcat.org/ and Farm Safety 4 Just Kids at www.fs4jk.org/.

 Back to Contents

Manual an important resource for roadside worker safety

Employee safety is a paramount concern for employers gearing up for work projects along busy roadways. Part VI of the Federal Highway Administration’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) contains guidelines for establishing a safe work environment for employees working in or near traffic.

Part VI of the MUTCD is the government’s “Standards and Guides for Traffic Controls for Street and Highway Construction, Maintenance, Utility and Incident Management Operations.” The 193 page booklet covers topics ranging from recommended high-visibility clothing and proper flagging techniques to the requirements for traffic zone signage and barricade placement.

Copies of this useful resource are available through the American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) at www.atssa.com, or by calling 540-368-1701. The price for the booklet is $9.75 for members and public officials and $15 for nonmembers.

Back to Contents

	Ask a Tech Rep
	by Mark Ormsby, Technical Representative
Q.	Does OSHA specify any requirements for emergency eye washes and showers?
A.	Yes, but they are not detailed. 29 CFR 1910.151 states, “Where the eyes or body of any person may be exposed to injurious corrosive chemicals, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body shall be provided within the work area for immediate emergency use.” Consult the American National Standard for Emergency Eye Wash and Shower Equipment, ANSI Z358.1-1998, for more specific information on this topic.
Q.	Are hand-held drench hoses and personal eye wash units adequate for protection under Z358.1- 1998?
A.	No. These devices are meant to support, but not replace, emergency shower and eye wash units. The main purpose of drench hoses and personal eye washes is to supply immediate drenching or flushing in a potentially hazardous area.
Q.	What type of training should be given to employees for using emergency eye washes and showers?
A.	Employees should be trained on the location(s) and proper use of these devices. In addition, the importance and proper maintenance of emergency eye washes and showers should be conveyed. During training it’s a good idea to emphasize that an injured co-worker may need assistance in locating and activating a unit.
Q.	Does the ANSI standard make reference to situations involving particularly hazardous chemicals?
A.	Yes, the standard states that for strong acids or caustics (bases), the device “should be immediately adjacent to the hazard.”
Q.	I’ve heard conflicting reports on the flow rate for emergency showers being either 20 or 30 gallons per minute (gpm). Which one is correct?
A.	The confusion causing this question lies in the ANSI standard. The 1990 version states the flow rate for an emergency shower should be 30 gpm, while the 1998 revision indicates a flow rate of 20 gpm. The 1998 standard should be followed.

Back to Contents

worth noting . . .

. . . The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has ratified a threshold limit value for hand activity, which is intended as a recommendation for industrial hygienists. For more information, point your Web browser to pubs.bna.com/ip/BNA/osh.nsf/id/a0a3x0v8u8 . . .
 
. . . Samsung Electronics is now in the Guinness Book of World Records. The company’s semiconductor complex at Kiheug, Korea, was officially entered into the book for achieving 211.6 million hours without a lost-time injury. The record is from November 1991 to August 1998, and has since been extended to 250 million hours. The plant employs 10,000 people in the production of semiconductor chips and LCD panels . . .

. . . The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) warn women of childbearing age about mercury in fish. Women who are pregnant or who are likely to become pregnant are advised by the FDA not to eat swordfish, shark, king mackerel and tilefish because they may have high levels of methylmercury. The EPA also issued a warning about consuming noncommercial fish that may have high mercury levels. For more information, check out www.fda.gov and www.epa.gov . . .

. . . The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is targeting older chemical plants and refineries to improve visibility at national parks. The proposal is aimed at facilities built between 1962 and 1977 that potentially could emit more than 250 tons per year of visibility-impairing air pollutants. Many of the facilities have been exempt from the Clean Air Act requirements. States will ultimately determine, some time during 2003 through 2005, which plants must either be retrofitted or join in emission trading programs to curtail haze that drifts into national parks . . .

Back to Contents

TECHlines^® is published bi-monthly by Lab Safety Supply Inc., PO Box 1368, Janesville, Wisconsin 53547-1368.
TECHlines^®'s goal is to provide accurate information on the subject matter covered. However, it is impossible to guarantee absolute accuracy of the materials. The publisher, therefore, cannot assume any responsibility for omissions, errors or misprinting contained within this publication.
For additional information, call Lab Safety Supply's Safety TECHline^® at 1-800-356-2501.