This month IN-OSHA has issued citations to a "service contractor" in the amount of $99,250 after one of their service technicians entered a roll-off type trash compactor to perform equipment repair, replacing a hydraulic pump and a directional valve on the Marathon Trash Compactor.  The plant was NOT cited and the contractor company involved in the repairs received 10 citations, one (1) Serious) and nine (9) Willful/Knowing.  Here is a breakdown of the citations:

Does your facaility have hazardous machinery?  Does your facaility have E-Stops on that hazardous machinery? 1910.144(a)(1)(iii) is a rarely used OSHA standard, but it does exist and it is VERY specific.  In fact IN-OSHA issued a citation against the standard this month.  Here is what it says...

As with any safety effort there are varying degrees of what all of us would consider being compliant vs. world-class safety.  When we enter the PSM/RMP realm this line gets even blurrier since these are "performance oriented" standards.  But a PSM/RMP audit SHOULD be much more than looking at just 1910.119 and Part 68!  There are dozens of other OSHA standards that have a DIRECT link to 1910.119 or an association with PSM/RMP that should be included in all PSM/RMP 3-year audits.  Here they are and how they are connected/associated to process safety...

Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) have requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigate gaps in regulatory oversight of the West, Texas fertilizer plant where an April 17 explosion killed 15 and injured more than 200. Miller, the senior Democratic member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, and Courtney, the senior Democratic member of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee, also asked the GAO to catalog similar facilities across the country and examine the risks to workers and surrounding communities.

OSHA has cited an industrial cleaning contractor for 28 serious safety violations following the death of a worker who fell from a ladder inside of a storage tank, apparently after being overcome by methylene chloride vapors at a chemical manufacturing facility. Eighteen of the serious violations involve confined space entry requirements, such as...

This is a first for me, that I can remember, but EPA discovered the facilities (2) started up BEOFRE they had submitted their RMPs.  The start-up date was approximately 30 before the RMPs were submitted.  Respondent constructed and assisted in the commissioning and start-up of an ethanol manufacturing facility, which consists of buildings, equipment, structures, and other stationary items which are located on a single site or on contiguous or adjacent sites, and which are currently owned and operated by

On March 19, 2012 EPA conducted a compliance inspection of food facility to determine its compliance with the Risk Management Plan ("RMP") regulations. EPA has determined that Respondent violated the following regulations:

Facility has been cited for 13 safety and health violations by OSHA following an inspection at its manufacturing facility. Proposed fines total $62,000.  One REPEAT safety violation, with a penalty of $22,000, involves the employer failing to reduce the pressure in a compressed air device to less than 30 pounds per square inch when using it for cleaning. The facility was previously cited for this same violation during an inspection in 2011.  Nine serious safety and health violations, with $37,800 in penalties, include:

Just two weeks ago we lost a dozen firefighters and speculation is there was no formal Incident Command set-up/communicated in the response (based on radio traffic from the scene and responders).  Here is another SIGNIFCANT INCIDENT involving a FULL Anhydrous Ammonia (NH3) tanker truck being struck by a train.  Note the appartus placement of the responding agencies at an ACTIVE RELEASE scene!  We can see ammonia vapor within the water fog pattern that is being used to "scrub" the vapors (just behind the red tractor).  This is NOT advanced training, but basics of setting up a HOT, WARM, COLD zone based on the material(s) and quantity(s) involved in the incident.  It amazes me that just weeks after we lost our brothers in TX that every single FD has not had a stand-down to discuss scene management, reviewing Tier II reports, IC role in ALL responses, etc. to ensure that our responders SAFETY IS #1!  I am sorry, but this response is just unacceptable, regardless of the events in West, TX.  There are many that will claim I need to shut up as I was not there and "just don't understand what was going on"!  So be it, but when the most basic ERG material calls for an intial isolation distance of 500' for large spill (even 100' if you want to call this a "small spill") and take a look at the appratus placement.  I also like the Level of PPE the gentleman is wearing!!! Just baffling!  Here is a news source for the incident.