We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
The federal government has been working to improve chemical facility safety and security, but two concepts intended to further that improvement are seemingly being left behind: Inherently Safer Design and the Safety Case.
When David Michaels took over at OSHA in 2009, and for several years following, he repeatedly called an Injury and Illness Prevention Program Standard his “No. 1 priority.” It seems priorities have changed.
For nearly three weeks, OSHA listened to stakeholders’ concerns and input during a series of hearings on the agency’s proposed crystalline silica rule. The end result, the agency hopes, is a final rule that better protects workers from the potentially deadly dust.
During a Feb. 4 hearing of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee, OSHA was accused of exceeding its authority and ignoring congressional mandates. But is the agency simply following the letter of the law?
OSHA’s recently proposed revision to its Recordkeeping Standard would require nearly half a million establishments to submit their injury and illness data. This is information employers already are required to keep – OSHA would simply collect it.
After a seemingly inactive period regarding new standards, OSHA appears to have gathered some regulatory momentum. Since the August publication of a proposed rule on crystalline silica exposure, the agency has been steadily pushing other rules.
When Congress failed to agree on funding levels for fiscal year 2014, which began Oct. 1, the first federal government shutdown in nearly 20 years led to furloughs for thousands of employees, as well as cutbacks of numerous government services.
RSS