|
|
|
 |
www.dol.gov/cio
|
 |
 |
 |
| October 7, 2008 DOL Home > CIO > Information Quality Correction Requests |  |
|
FY 2003 Information Quality Correction Requests FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: May 3, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: On OSHA's web site, the following regulation (1910.124) is missing some text: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document ?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id--74&p_text_versionuLSE 1910.124(j)(4) and (j)(5) are missing. See bottom of page. Description of Requested Correction: "Complete the text with the missing information." Influential: ____ Yes __X__ No __ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete, no correction. Forwarded request to Directorate of Standards & Guidance. On May 16, 2003 Directorate of Standards and Guidance/OSHA, (202) 693-1982 tested the site and found no text missing. OSHA sent Email to correspondent on May 28, 2003 indicating that the site had been tested and no text found to be missing. It was suggested that perhaps there was a glitch in the correspondent's server or computer when the text was pulled up on the OSHA website. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ____ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA/DEA Date Received: April 17, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Construction Standard, Section 1926.50 Appendix A, second paragraph refers to the OSHA "200" log. Should this text have been amended when OSHA changed the recordkeeping form to the 300s? Description of Requested Correction: Asks that the correction be made and that someone let him know when it is amended. Influential: ____ Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete, no correction. On 10/14/03 OSHA emailed him that change would not be done as this problem represents a major website revision issue. It is not just the 29 CFR Standards, but documents of every type, from many different offices. It is the responsibility of the web officers for the originating offices, to review and keep their documents up-to-date, and for submitting updates to the Webmaster for any specific changes to their documents. In the regulatory text and preamble that was produced in 2001 when the new OSHA Recordkeeping Forms were proposed, it was noted that whenever the term "200 Log" is used in the new regulatory text, it is referring to the form used prior to the effective date (January 1, 2002) of the new Forms. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: August 20, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: In the Establishment Search Inspection Data, information regarding one of their clients has been incorrectly stated. Description of Requested Correction: The requestor has a copy of the fully Executed Stipulated Settlement Agreement which states the proper information and the signed Judge's Order Approving Settlement. Influential: ____Yes ____ No __X__ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. Directorate of Enforcement Programs contacted the requestor to determine the identification of the establishment and its location on September 9, 2003 and the matter was settled to their mutual satisfaction by posting the correct information supplied by the requestor on September 16, 2003. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: December 11, 2002, received electronically Summary of Request: Error in DIR 02-02 (TED 3.5) Description of Requested Correction: TED 3.5 left out the denominator in the calculation of percent difference the site is from the industry average. The BLS industry rate should be in the denominator. The correspondent puts the site rate in the denominator which is also incorrect. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: On 12/13/02 correspondent was sent following Email: "We have attempted to correct this error in the past, but for some reason it keeps deleting the denominator when put on the web. It seems to be a formatting problem because the formula is correct in the hard copy of the directive. i.e....[Site Rate-BLS rate]/BSL rate x 100. Our regions know the correct formula and have been informed that the web site is incorrect." On 03/25/03 TED 8.4 (containing the correction) replaced OSHA Instruction TED 8.1a and OSHA Direction DIR 02-02 (TED 3.5, which were canceled. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: October 11, 2002, received electronically Summary of Request: Error on OSHA Bulletin Concerning Laser Hazards Description of Requested Correction: In the excerpt below the 0.4 w should be 0.4 mw. This makes a tremendous difference! Lasers and laser systems are assigned one of four broad Classes (I to IV) depending on the potential for causing biological damage. The biological basis of the hazard classes are summarized in Table III:6-4.a. Class I: cannot emit laser radiation at known hazard levels (typically continuous wave: cw 0.4 w at visible wavelengths). Users of Class I laser products are generally exempt from radiation hazard controls during operation and maintenance (but not necessarily during service). Since lasers are not classified on beam access during service, most Class…. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. Tech Support posted correction as of 11/04/03. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: June 26, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Grocery warehousing e-CAT missing text and Figures 10 and 11. Description of Requested Correction: Need to include references to Figure 10 and Figure 11 and insert correct paragraphs. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress__X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. The problem was found and the correction made. The requestor was informed on July 23, 2003 that the corrections had been posted on the website. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: May 2, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Inclusion of AMA in Guidelines for
First Aid Programs Description of Requested Correction: Add following paragraph: "The American Heart Association Heartsaver First Aid Course provides training in basic first aid procedures, with the opportunity for training in adult CPR and the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs). The American Heart Association offers standard and advanced first aid courses throughout the United States via their Training Centers. After completion of the course and successful passing of the written and practical tests, trainees receive a certification card in either first aid, first aid with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or first aid with CPR and AED." Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. Paragraph posted on the OSHA website as requested on May 22, 2003. Appeal Request: __ X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: August 20, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Correct inspection information regarding ownership as it reflects badly on current owner, Liquid Container. Description of Requested Correction: Wants information removed as it pertains to an establishment purchased by the complainant 3 years after the inspection and citations were issued to the former owner. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Email message stated: "The OSHA database's Establishment Search function is designed to present the history of OSHA activity at a specific worksite, not the history of a specific employer. There is no information in the database that would indicate the owner of the establishment. Therefore, all inspections of Liquid Container will be displayed in response to an establishment search of that name. Please be assured that any subsequent OSHA actions at the site which take into account the history of violations, such as issuance of repeat or willful violations, would not be based solely on an establishment search but would take into consideration other information such as ownership. I hope that this information serves to clarify our policy." Appeal Request: ____ none ____ in progress __X__
completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: OSHA's own definition of "Establishment Name" states, "Identifies the employer who was inspected", not the activity at a specific worksite. Owner at time of inspection was U.S. Container Corporation and not Liquid Container. Type of Appeal Process Used: Senior official review Appeal Resolution: Closed, appeal complete w/correction. In response to the requestor's email, OSHA's data office has changed the database so that a search for "Liquid Container" will only bring up the inspections at the Fruitland Avenue address since December 1999. Currently, three inspections are shown, all in 2002 or 2003. The earlier inspections are now listed under "United States Container Corp." Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: July 1, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Missing Table O-12 Description of Requested Correction: Upon reviewing the subject standards, I noted a reference to a Table O-12 in 1910.219(e)(1)(i) and 1910.219(o)(5)(ii), and 1926.307(e)(1)(i) and 1926.307(o)(5)(ii). However, I cannot find Table O-12 anywhere in 1910 or 1926. 1910, Subpart O, has a Table O-11, but none higher (Figures O-1 through O-38 do not relate to the topic). 1926, Subpart I, has no tables at all (Figures I-1 to I-12 do not relate to the topic), and 1926, Subpart O "Motor Vehicles, Mechanized Equipment, and Marine Operations" not only does not relate to the topic but has neither Tables or Figures. The same error has existed in past years. Can we get it corrected? Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete with correction. The errors noted in §§1910.219 and 1926.307 have been corrected. The technical amendment correcting those errors was published in the Federal Register on June 8, 2004. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: August 21, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Critique of OSHA 3115 Handbook (Underground Construction) Description of Requested Correction: Wants proofreading corrections made Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. The correspondent was informed via Email dated 10/21/2003 that "…this publication has been updated and is scheduled for archiving within the next few days. The hard copy version of this 1996 publication was correct. The 2003 hard copy version has been available since August, 25, 2003 from the OSHA publications center at 202-693-1888." The 2003 electronic copy appeared on the OSHA Internet site as of 11/01/2003. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: March 6, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: OSHA Technical Manual Correction Description of Requested Correction: The manual at link www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_ii/otm_ii_1.html refers to the Sensidyne-Gastec Model 800 Part No. 7010657 (piston). Sensidyne no longer holds the rights to distribute Gastec products. NEXTTEQ, LLC is now the exclusive U.S. master wholesale distributor. Additionally, the pump has been updated and has a new part number and name. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. Contacted company in Japan on a couple of the verbiage issues and on 05/06/03 OSHA posted the following changes: From: "SENSIDYNE-GASTEC, MODEL 800, PART NO. 7010657-1 (PISTON). This pump can be checked for leaks as mentioned for the Kitagawa pump; however, the handle should be released after 1 minute, and should return to within 6-mm or less of resting or fully closed position. Periodic relubrication of the pump head, the piston gasket, and the piston check valve is needed and is use-dependent." To: "NEXTTEQ, LLC (GASTEC MODEL GV-100 PISTON SAMPLING PUMP). When checking the pump for leaks, first confirm that the inlet clamping nut is firmly tightened. Next, push the pump handle fully in and align the guide marks on the pump shaft and handle. Then insert a fresh unbroken tube into the rubber inlet of the pump. Pull out the handle fully until it is locked, and wait 1 minute. Unlock the handle (by turning it more than 1/4 turn) and guide it back gradually applying a little force. Otherwise, the handle will spring back due to the vacuum in the cylinder and may damage the internal parts. Confirm the handle returns to the initial position and the guideline on the pump shaft is not seen. If this is not confirmed, follow the maintenance procedures explained in the operations manual for the Model GV-100 pump, or contact your Nextteq representative for maintenance assistance. The maintenance procedures involve leak checks on the inlet clamping nut and rubber inlet, and performing pump cylinder lubrication. Nextteq is Gastec's exclusive U.S. master wholesale distributor. The Gastec Corporation manufactures Gastec tubes and pumps." Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: July 1, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Possible Error in Summary Table of Beryllium Exposure Description of Requested Correction: Error in summary
table of beryllium exposure limits (http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/beryllium/index.html):
according to Table Z-2 Similarly, "30-minute" modifier is applied erroneously to ceiling limit
and not to peak exposure limit on following page: Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete, no correction. OSHA E-mailed the requestor that there is no error and that OSHA's explanation of ceiling values and peak values is more clearly described in 1910.1000 under paragraph (b)(2). Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: August 20, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Incorrect Name for American Dental Hygienists'Association Description of Requested Correction: "American Dental Hygiene Association." is incorrect and should read, "The American Dental Hygienists' Association." Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. Correction posted on website on 08/21/03. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: August 21, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: Incorrect SIC Code Description of Requested Correction: Motorola - Fort Worth Complex has the wrong SIC Code on the VPP charts located on http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/vpp/index.html . Both charts have our SIC code as 2869 which is incorrect. The correct SIC code is 3663. Please correct or advise whom to contact concerning this error. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Closed, review complete w/correction. OSHA Fed/State Ops authorized the correction, which was made in the latest monthly VPP stats for August which were posted on the OSHA website as of 09/19/2003. (Only the current month's VPP stats are posted online.) Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/OSHA-DEA Date Received: August 20, 2003, received electronically Summary of Request: OSHA 1910.145 - Specifications for accident prevention signs and tags, sites American National Standard Z53.1-1967. The present version of the ANSI specification is Z53.1-1998. Is it implied that the latest version should be adhered to when new designs are in process? Description of Requested Correction: Wants updates, which OSHA will provide as soon as FEDERAL REGISTER publication and process of changing regulations is completed. Influential: ____Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined First Agency Response ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Correspondent informed via Email that updates are scheduled, but will be take time as must be published in FEDERAL REGISTER. He was given a contact name and number for further updating information. Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/MSHA Date Received:: November 18, 2002 by email Summary of Request: An error in the Number of Surface Coal Empl. Historical Statistics 1931 - 2001 Description of Requested Correction: Same as above. Influential: ___ Yes __X__ No __Undetermined First Agency Response: ___in progress __X__ completed Resolution: Correction made Appeal Request: __X__ none ___in progress ___completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOL/MSHA Date Received : Received September 12, 2003 by email Summary of Request: The requestor stated, "While reviewing the data for our citation history I saw the information for 1998 is incorrect. All citations for that year have been duplicated resulting in information suggesting we had twice as many citations in 1998 as actually occurred. If you could please help me correct this matter I would appreciate it." Description of Requested Correction: Same as above Influential: ___Yes __X__ No ___ Undetermined First Agency Response: ___ in progress __X__ completed Resolution: Computer system bug was corrected. Appeal Request: __X__ none ___ in progress ___ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: Agency Receiving Correction Request: U.S. Department of Labor – Veterans' Employment and Training Service Date Received: February 5, 2003 via E-mail Summary of Request: Change of Address on our web page: Under the job description of Radiotelephone Operator we would like to have our 800-288-3824 number listed and the address is a location that we were at four years ago. Description of Requested Correction: The correct address should be: Electronics Technicians Association, Intl Influential: ___Yes __X__ No First Agency Response: ____ in progress __X__
completed Resolution: Eliminated page which contained incorrect
address. Provided link to new, alternative and consolidated website: Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ____ completed Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Type of Appeal Process Used: Appeal Resolution: |
|
|||||||
| ||||||||
