|
U.S. Department of Labor | |
||||
| Occupational Safety & Health Administration | ||||||
 |
|
Directives
CPL 02-00-034 - CPL 2.34 CH-10 - Change to the Construction Standard Alleged Violation Elements (SAVEs) Manual. |
Directives - Table of Contents |
| • Record Type: | Instruction |
| • Directive Number: | CPL 02-00-034 |
| • Old Directive Number: | CPL 2.34 CH-10 |
| • Title: | Change to the Construction Standard Alleged Violation Elements (SAVEs) Manual. |
| • Information Date: | 07/25/1994 |
| • Standard Number: | 1926.63 |
|
OSHA Instruction CPL 2.34 CH-10 July 25, 1994 Office of General Industry Compliance Assistance Subject: Change to the Construction Standard Alleged Violation Elements (SAVEs) Manual A. Purpose. This instruction transmits revised and new pages to the Construction SAVEs manual for Cadmium. B. Scope. This instruction applies OSHA-wide C. Action. Regional Administrators and Area Directors shall ensure that all compliance personnel:
D. Background. 29 CFR 1926.63 Occupational Exposure to Cadmium Final Rules were published in the Federal Register, September 14, 1992, Vol. 57, No. 178. E. State Plan States. Regional Administrators shall advise State designees of the action required by this instruction and encourage their participation in the SAVEs program. John B. Miles, Jr., Director Directorate of Compliance Programs DISTRIBUTION: National, Regional, and Area Offices Compliance Officers State Designees Area Office Clericals 11(c)/405 Programs NIOSH Regional Program Directors 1 29 CFR 1926.63(c): The employer did not ensure that no employee was exposed to an airborne concentration of cadmium in excess of five micrograms per cubic meter of air (5 ug/m3), calculated as an eight-hour time-weighted average exposure (TWA):
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(i): The employer did not establish the applicability of this standard by determining whether cadmium was present in the work place and whether there was the possibility that employee exposure will be at or above the action level prior to performance of any construction where employees could be potentially exposed to cadmium:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(i): The employer did not designate a competent person to make a determination whether there was the possibility that employee exposure will be at or above the action level prior to performance of any construction where employees could be potentially exposed to cadmium:
OPTION 3 4 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that investigation and material testing techniques were used in this determination, including a review of relevant plans, past reports, material safety data sheets, and other available records, and consultations with the property owner and discussions with appropriate individuals and agencies:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(ii): Where cadmium had been determined to be present in the work place and there was a possibility the employee's exposure could be at or above the action level, the employer did not ensure that the competent person identify these employees:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(iii): Determinations of employee exposure was not made from the breathing-zone air samples that reflect the monitored employee's regular, daily 8-hour TWA exposure to cadmium:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(iv): The employer did not ensure that the competent person determined eight-hour TWA for each employee on the basis of one or more personal breathing zone air samples reflecting full shift exposure on each shift, for each job classification, in each work area:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(iv): The employer did not ensure that the competent person on representative sampling sampled the employee(s) expected to have the highest cadmium exposure:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(i): In initial monitoring, the employer did not conduct exposure monitoring as soon as practicable that was representative of the exposure for each employee in the workplace who was or could be exposed to cadmium at or above the action level where a determination conducted under 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1)(i) showed the possibility of employee exposure to cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(ii): When an employee periodically performed tasks that could expose the employee to a higher concentration of airborne cadmium, the employer did not monitor the employee while performing these tasks:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(iv): The employer did not establish a written record when a determination conducted under 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(1) or 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2) was made that a potentially exposed employee was not exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium at or above the action level:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(iv): The employer's written record of determination did not include at least the monitoring data developed under 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(i) - 29 CFR 1926.63 (d)(2)(iii):
OPTION 3 1 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(iv): The employer's written record of determination did not include date of determination, the name, and social security number of each employee:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(3)(i): When the initial monitoring or periodic monitoring revealed employee exposures to be at or above the action level, the employer did not monitor at a frequency and pattern needed to ensure that the monitoring results reflected typical exposure levels, given the variability in the tasks performed, work practices, and environmental conditions on the job site, and ensure the adequacy of respiratory selection and effectiveness of engineering and work practice controls:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(4): The employer did not institute the exposure monitoring required by 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(i) and 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(3) whenever there had been a change in the raw materials, equipment, personnel, work practices, or finished products that could result in additional employees being exposed to cadmium at or above the action level or in employees already exposed to cadmium at or above the action level or above the PEL:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(4): The employer did not institute the exposure monitoring required by 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(2)(i) and 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(3) whenever the employer or competent person had any reason to suspect that any other change could result in such further exposure to cadmium at or above the action level or above the PEL:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(5)(i): No later than 5 working days after the receipt of the results of any monitoring under this section, the employer did not notify each affected employee individually in writing of the results:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(5)(i): No later than 5 working days after the receipt of the results of any monitoring under this section, the employer did not post the results of the exposure monitoring in an appropriate location that was accessible to all affected employees:
OPTION 1 4 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(5)(ii): Whenever the monitoring results indicated that employee exposure exceeded the PEL the employer did not include in the written notice a statement that the PEL had been exceeded:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(5)(ii): Whenever the monitoring results indicated that employee exposure exceeded the PEL the employer did not include in the written notice a description of the corrective action being taken by the employer to reduce employee exposure to or below the PEL:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(d)(6): The employer did not use a method of monitoring and analysis that had an accuracy of not less than plus or minus 25 percent (+ 25%), with a confidence level of 95 percent, for airborne concentrations of cadmium at or above the action level, and the permissible exposure limit:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(e)(1): The employer did not establish a regulated area wherever an employee's exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium was, or could reasonably be expected to be in excess of the permissible exposure limit (PEL):
4 29 CFR 1926.63(e)(2): Regulated areas were not demarcated from the rest of the workplace in a manner that adequately established and alerted employees to the boundaries of the regulated area, including employees who were or could be incidentally in the regulated areas, and that would protect persons outside the area from exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium in excess of the PEL:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(e)(3): Access to regulated areas established for exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium, was not limited to authorized persons:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(e)(4): Each person entering a regulated area established for exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium was not supplied with and required to use a respirator, selected in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63 (g)(2):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(e)(5): The employer did not ensure that employees did not eat, drink, smoke, chew tobacco or gum, or apply cosmetics in regulated areas established for exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium, carry the products associated with these activities into regulated areas, or store such products in those areas:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(1)(i): The employer did not implement engineering and work practice controls to reduce and maintain employee exposure to cadmium at or below the PEL:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(1)(iii): Whenever engineering and work practice controls were required and were not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the PEL, the employer did not implement such controls to reduce exposures to the lowest levels achievable:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(1)(iii): Whenever engineering and work practice controls were required and were not sufficient to reduce employee exposure, the employer did not supplement such controls with respiratory protection that complied with the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.63(g) and the PEL:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(1)(iv): The employer used employee rotation as a method of compliance:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(2)(i): Abrasive blasting on cadmium or cadmium-containing materials was not conducted in a manner that would provide adequate protection:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(2)(ii): Welding, cutting, and other forms of heating cadmium or cadmium-containing materials were not conducted in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1926 .353 and 29 CFR 1926.354:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(3)(i): High speed abrasive disc saws and similar abrasive power equipment were permitted to be used for work on cadmium or cadmium-containing materials equipped without appropriate engineering controls to minimize emissions, when exposures levels were above the PEL:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(3)(ii): Materials containing cadmium were permitted to be applied by spray method when exposured levels were above the PEL without employees being protected with supplied-air respirators with full facepiece, hood, helmet, and suit, operated in positive pressure mode or measures were not instituted to limit overspray and prevent contamination of adjacent areas:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(4)(i): When ventilation was used to control exposure, measurements that demonstrated the effectiveness of the system in controlling exposure, such as capture velocity, duct velocity, or static pressure were not made as necessary to maintain its effectiveness:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(4)(ii): Measurements of the system's effectiveness in controlling exposure were not made as necessary within five working days of any change in production, process, or control that could result in a significant increase in employee exposure to cadmium:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(4)(iii): When air from exhaust ventilation was recirculated into the workplace, the system did not have a high efficiency filter and/or was not monitored to ensure effectiveness:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(4)(iv): Procedures were not developed and implemented to minimize employee exposure to cadmium when maintenance of ventilation systems and changing of filters were being conducted:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(5)(i): The employer did not establish and implement a written compliance program prior to commencement of the job as required 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(1) when employee exposure to cadmium could exceed the PEL:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(5)(i): The employer did not include in the written compliance program the use of appropriate respiratory protection to achieve compliance with the PEL when engineering and work practice controls could not reduce exposure to below the PEL:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(5)(ii): The written compliance program was not reviewed and updated as often and as promptly as necessary to reflect significant changes in the employer's compliance status or significant changes in the lowest air cadmium level that was technologically feasible:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(5)(iii): The employer did not ensure that a competent person reviewed the comprehensive compliance program initially and after each change:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1): Where respirators were required the employer did not provide them at no cost to the employee:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1): Where respirators were required the employer did not ensure that they were used in compliance with the requirements of this section:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that respirators provided to the employees were used during the time period necessary to install or implement feasible engineering and work practice controls, when exposure levels to cadmium exceeded the PEL:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(ii): The employer did not ensure that respirators provided to the employee were used in those maintenance and repair activities where cadmium exposures exceeded the PEL and engineering and work practice controls were not feasible or were not required:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(iii): The employer did not ensure that respirators provided to the employee were used in regulated areas prescribed in 29 CFR 1926.63(e):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(iv): The employer did not ensure that respirators were used when the employer had implemented all feasible engineering and work practice controls and such controls were not sufficient to reduce employee cadmium exposures to or below the PEL:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(v): The employer did not ensure that respirators were used in emergencies involving cadmium exposures:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(vi): When an employee who was exposed to cadmium at or above the action level, the employer did not provide a respirator when requested by the employee:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(1)(vii): The employer did not provide a respirator when an employee was exposed to cadmium above the PEL and engineering controls were not required under 29 CFR 1926.63(f)(1)(ii):
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(i): Where respirators were required the employer did not select and provide the appropriate respirator as specified in Table 1:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(i): The respirators selected by the employer were not among those jointly approved as acceptable protection against cadmium dust, fume, and mist by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) under the provisions of 30 CFR part 11:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(ii)(A): The employer did not provide a powered, air purifying respirator (PAPR) in lieu of a negative pressure respirator to an employee, entitled to a respirator, who chose to use this type of respirator:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(ii)(B): The employer did not provide a powered, air purifying respirator (PAPR) in lieu of a negative pressure respirator when the former would not provide adequate protection to the employee:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(i): Where respiratory protection was required for protection against cadmium, the employer did not institute a respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(ii): The employer did not permit each employee who was required to use an air purifying respirator for protection against cadmium exposure, to leave the regulated area to change the filter elements or replace the respirator whenever an increase in breathing resistance was detected:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(ii): The employer did not maintain an adequate supply of filter elements for air purifying respirators in order that the employee could change the filter elements whenever an increase in breathing resistance was detected:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(iii): The employer did not permit each employee who was required to wear a respirator for protection against cadmium to leave the regulated area to wash his or her face and the respirator facepiece whenever necessary to prevent skin irritation associated with respirator use:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(iv): When an employee exhibited difficulty in breathing when wearing a respirator during a fit test or during use, the employer did not make available to the employee a medical examination in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(ii) and determine if the employee could wear a respirator while performing the required duties:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(v): An employee was assigned a task requiring the use of a respirator for protection against cadmium exposure when based on his or her most recent examination, the examining physician determined that the employee would be unable to continue to function normally while wearing a respirator:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(3)(v): When a physician determined that an employee must be limited in or removed from his or her current job because of the employee's inability to wear a respirator for protection against cadmium exposure and the limitation or removal was not in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11) and 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(12):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(i): The employer did not ensure that respirators issued to employees, for protection against cadmium exposure, were fitted properly and exhibited the least possible facepiece leakage:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(ii): The employer did not perform either quantitative or qualitative fit testing at the time of initial fitting and at least annually thereafter for each employee wearing a tight-fitting, air purifying respirator (either negative or positive pressure) who was exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that did not exceed 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m3 = 50 ug/m3):
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(ii): Quantitative fit testing was used for a negative pressure respirator for an employee who was exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that did not exceed 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m3 = 50 ug/m3) and a fit factor of at least 10 times the protection factor for that class of respirators (Table 1 in 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(i)) was not achieved at testing:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(iii): The employer did not perform quantitative fit testing at the time of initial fitting and at least annually thereafter for each employee wearing a tight-fitting, air purifying respirator (either negative or positive pressure) who was exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that exceeded 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m3 = 50 ug/m3):
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(iii): Quantitative fit testing for a negative pressure respirator of an employee who was exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that exceeded 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m3 = 50 ug/m3) did not achieve a fit factor of at least 10 times the protection factor for that class of respirators (Table 1 in 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(i)):
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(iv): The employer did not perform quantitative fit testing at the time of initial fitting and at least annually thereafter for each employee wearing a tight-fitting, supplied-air respirator or self-contained breathing apparatus:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(iv): The initial or annual quantitative fit testing of for employees wearing a tight-fitting, supplied-air respirator or self-contained breathing apparatus was not accomplished by fit testing an air purifying respirator of identical type facepiece, make, model and size as the supplied-air respirator or self- contained breathing apparatus with the air purifying respirator equipped with HEPA filters and tested as a surrogate (substitute) in the negative pressure mode:
OPTION 3 3 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(iv): A fit factor that was at least 10 times the protection factor for that class of respirators (Table 1 in 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(2)(i) was not achieved during quantitative fit testing:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(g)(4)(v): Respirator fit testing of employees who were exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium was not conducted in accordance with Appendix C of 29 CFR 1926.63:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(h): The employer did not develop and implement a written plan for dealing with emergency situations involving substantial releases of airborne cadmium:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(h): The employer's written plan for dealing with emergency situations involving substantial releases of airborne cadmium did not include provisions for the use of appropriate respirators and personal protective equipment:
OPTION 3 4 29 CFR 1926.63(h): Employees not essential to correcting emergency situations involving substantial releases of airborne cadmium were not restricted from the area and normal operations halted in that area until the emergency was abated:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(1): The employer did not provide at no cost to the employees and ensure that employees used appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevents contamination of the employees and the employees' garments, when employees were exposed to airborne cadmium above the PEL, or where skin or eye irritation was associated with cadmium exposure at any level:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(1): Skin or eye irritation associated with cadmium exposure at any level and the employer did not provide at no cost to the employees, and assure that employees used, appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevented contamination of the employees and the employees' garments:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(1)(i): The protective work clothing and equipment provided by the employer to prevent contamination of the employee and the employee's garments from airborne cadmium did not include coveralls or similar full-body work clothing:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(1)(ii): The protective work clothing and equipment provided by the employer to prevent contamination of the employee and the employee's garments from airborne cadmium did not include gloves, head coverings, and boots or foot coverings:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(1)(iii): The protective work clothing and equipment provided by the employer to prevent contamination of the employee and the employee's garments from airborne cadmium did not include face shields, vented goggles, or other appropriate equipment that complied with 29 CFR 1910.133:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(2)(i): The employer did not ensure that employees removed all protective clothing and equipment contaminated with cadmium at the completion of the work shift:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(2)(i): The employer did not ensure that employees removed all protective clothing and equipment contaminated with cadmium in change rooms provided in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(1):
4 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(2)(ii): The employer did not ensure that no employee took cadmium-contaminated protective clothing or equipment from the workplace:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(2)(iii): The employer did not ensure that cadmium-contaminated protective clothing and equipment, when removed for laundering, cleaning, maintenance, or disposal, were placed and stored in sealed, impermeable bags or other closed, impermeable containers that were designed to prevent dispersion of cadmium dust:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(2)(iv): The employer did not ensure that bags or containers of cadmium-contaminated protective clothing and equipment that were to be taken out of change rooms or the workplace for laundering, cleaning, maintenance or disposal bore labels in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63 (m)(2):
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide the protective clothing and equipment required by 29 CFR 1926 .63(i)(1) in a clean and dry condition as often as necessary to maintain its effectiveness against airborne cadmium:
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide the protective clothing and equipment required by 29 CFR 1926.63 (i)(1) for protection against airborne cadmium in a clean and dry condition in at least weekly intervals:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(ii): The employer did not repair or replace the required protective clothing or equipment as needed in order to maintain its effectiveness against exposure to airborne cadmium:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(ii): Rips or tears were present in protective clothing while an employee was working and the worksuit was not immediately mended, or the worksuit immediately replaced by the employer:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(iii): The employer did not prohibit the removal of cadmium from protective clothing and equipment by blowing, shaking, or any other means that dispersed cadmium into the air:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(iv): The employer did not ensure that any laundering of contaminated clothing or cleaning of contaminated equipment in the workplace was done in a manner that would prevent the release of airborne cadmium in excess of the permissible exposure limit prescribed in 29 CFR 1926.63(c):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(i)(3)(v): The employer did not inform any person who laundered or cleaned protective clothing or equipment contaminated with cadmium of the potentially harmful effects of exposure to cadmium and that the clothing and equipment should be laundered or cleaned in a manner to effectively prevent the release of airborne cadmium in excess of the PEL:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(1): When employees whose airborne exposure to cadmium was above the PEL, the employer did not provide clean change rooms, handwashing facilities, showers, and lunchroom facilities that complied with 29 CFR 1926.51:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(2): The employer did not ensure that change rooms were equipped with separate storage facilities for street clothes and for protective clothing and equipment:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(3)(i): The employer did not ensure that employees who were exposed to cadmium above the PEL, showered during the end of the work shift:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(3)(ii): The employer did not ensure that employees whose airborne exposure to cadmium was above the PEL washed their hands and faces prior to eating, drinking, smoking, chewing tobacco or gum, or applying cosmetics:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(4)(i): The employer did not ensure that lunchroom facilities were readily accessible to employees, that tables for eating were maintained free of cadmium, and that no employee in a lunchroom was exposed at any time to cadmium at or above a concentration of 2.5 ug/m3:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(j)(4)(ii): The employer did not ensure that employees did not enter lunchroom facilities with protective work clothing or equipment unless surface cadmium had been removed from the clothing and equipment by HEPA vacuuming or some other method that removed cadmium dust without dispersing it:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practical of accumulations of cadmium:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(2): All spills and sudden releases of material containing cadmium were not cleaned up as soon as possible:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(3): Wherever possible, surfaces contaminated with cadmium were not cleaned by vacuuming or other methods that minimize the likelihood of cadmium becoming airborne:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(4): HEPA-filtered vacuuming equipment or equally effective filtration methods were not used for vacuuming of cadmium dust:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(4): Vacuuming equipment was not used and emptied in a manner that minimized the reentry of cadmium into the workplace:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(5): Shoveling, dry or wet sweeping, or brushing was used before vacuuming or other methods that minimize the likelihood of cadmium becoming airborne had been tried and were found not to be effective:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(6): Compressed air was used to remove cadmium from a surface and the compressed air was not used in conjunction with a ventilation system designed to capture the dust cloud created by the compressed air:
OPTION 1 5 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(7): Waste, scrap, debris, bags, containers, personal protective equipment, and clothing contaminated with cadmium and consigned for disposal was not collected and disposed in sealed impermeable bags or other closed, impermeable containers:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1926.63(k)(7): Sealed impermeable bags or other closed, impermeable containers containing waste, scrap, debris, bags, containers, personal protective equipment, and clothing contaminated with cadmium and consigned for disposal was not labeled in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63 (m)(2):
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1919.63(l)(1)(i)(A): The employer did not institute a medical surveillance program for all employees who were or could be exposed to cadmium at or above the action level:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1919.63(l)(1)(i)(A): The employer did not institute a medical surveillance program for all employees who performed the following tasks, operations or jobs; electrical grounding with welding; cutting, brazing, burning; grinding or welding on surfaces that were painted with cadmium paints; electrical work using cadmium-coated conduit; use of cadmium containing paints; cutting and welding cadmium-plated steel; brazing or welding with cadmium alloys; fusing of reinforcing steel by cadmium welding; maintaining or retrofitting cadmium-coated equipment; and wrecking and demolition where cadmium was present:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i)(B): The employer did not institute a medical surveillance program for all employees who prior to December 14, 1992 could previously have been exposed to cadmium at or above the action level:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not provide the limited medical examination specified in 29 CFR 1926.63 (l)(6) to determine an employee's fitness for using a respirator:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(iii): The employer did not ensure that the all medical examinations and procedures required by 29 CFR 1926.63 were performed by or under the supervision of a licensed physician, who had read and was familiar with the health effects section of Appendix A, the regulatory text, the protocol for sample handling, laboratory selection in Appendix F, and the questionnaire of Appendix D:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(iv): The employer did not provide without cost to employees medical surveillance required by this section, including multiple physician review under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(13) at a time and place that was reasonable and convenient to employees:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(v): The employer did not ensure that the collecting and handling of biological samples of cadmium in urine (CdU), cadmium in blood (CdB), and beta-2 micro- globulin in urine (a2-M) taken from employees was done in a manner that ensured their reliability and that analysis of biological samples of cadmium in urine (CdU), cadmium in blood (CdB), and beta-2 microglobulin in urine (a2-M) taken from employees was performed in laboratories which demon- strated proficiency for that particular analyte:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(i): The employer did not provide an initial examination to all employees covered by the medical surveillance program required in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i):
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(i): The employer did not provide an initial examination to an employee within 30 days after initial assignment to a job with exposure to cadmium:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(A): The employer did not ensure that initial medical examination included a detailed medical and work history, with emphasis on past, present, and anticipated future exposure to cadmium; any history of renal, cardiovascular, respiratory, hematopoietic, reproductive, and/or musculo-skeletal systems; current of medication with potential nephrotoxic side-effects; smoking history and current status:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B)(1): The employer's biological monitoring did not include cadmium in urine (CdU), standardized to grams of creatinine (g/Cr):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B)(2): The employer's biological monitoring did not include beta-2 microglobulin in urine (a2-M), standardized to grams of creatinine (g/Cr), with pH specified as described in appendix F:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B)(3): The employer biological monitoring did not include cadmium in blood CdB) standardized to liters of whole blood (lwb):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(i)(A): The employer did not provide the minimum level of periodic medical surveillance when the results of biological monitoring tests showed the employee's CdU level to be at or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level to be at or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level to be at or below 5 ug/lwb for current and anticipated exposed employees under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i)(A) and in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(i):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(i)(B): The employer did not provide biological monitoring for CdU, B2-M, and CdB one year after initial biological monitoring tests showed the employee's CdU level to be at or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level to be at or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level to be at or below 5 ug/lwb for previously exposed employees who are subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i)(B) and the employer did not comply with the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(vi):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(A)(1): The employer did not within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test and when results showed the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of B2-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb reassess the employee's work practices and personal hygiene of employee's occupational exposure to cadmium who were subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(A)(2): The employer did not within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test and when results showed the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of B2-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb reevaluate the employee's respirator use, if any, and the respirator program:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(A)(3): The employer did not within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test and when results show the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of B2-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb review the hygiene facilities:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(A)(4): The employer did not within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test and when results showed the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of B2-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb reevaluate the maintenance and effectiveness of the relevant engineering controls:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(A)(5): The employer did not within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test and when results showed the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of B2-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb assess the employee's smoking history and status:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(B): The employer did not within 30 days after the exposure reassessment specified in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3(ii)(A) take reasonable steps to correct any deficiencies found in the reassessment that could be reasonable for the excess exposure to cadmium:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)((ii)(C): The employer did not within 90 days after receipt of biological monitoring results provide a full medical examination to the employee in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.63 (l)(4)(ii):
OPTION 2 4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(C): The employer did not ensure after completing the medical examination that the examining physician determine in a written medical opinion whether to medically remove the employee from the cadmium area:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(C)(1): The employer did not provide biological monitoring in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B) or on a semiannual basis until the employee's CdU level fell to or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb when the physician determined that medical removal was not necessary:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(C)(2): The employer did not provide annual medical examinations in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii) until the employee's CdU level fell to or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb when the physician determined that medical removal was not necessary:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(iii): The employer did not comply with the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(ii)(A) for all employees who were subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i), when the results of the initial biological monitoring tests showed the level of CdU to be in excess of 15 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to be in excess of 15 ug/lwb, or the level of B2-M to be in excess of 1,500 ug/g Cr:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(iii)(A): The employer did not periodically reassess the employee's occupational exposure to cadmium when the employee was not required to be removed by the mandatory provisions or by the physician's determination, until the employee's CdU level fell to or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(iii)(B): The employer did not provide biological monitoring in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63 (l)(2)(ii)(B) on a quarterly basis when the employee was not required to be removed by the mandatory provisions or by the physician's determination, until the employee's CdU level fell to or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3)(iii)(C): The employer did not provide semiannual medical examinations in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii) when the employee was not required to be removed by the mandatory provisions or by the physician's determination, until the employee's CdU level fell to or below 3 ug/g Cr, B2-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(i): The employer did not provide at least the minimum level of periodic medical surveillance, which consisted of periodic medical examinations and periodic biological monitoring for each employee who was covered under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i)(A):
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(i): The employer did not provide periodic medical examination within one year after the initial examination required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2) and thereafter at least biennially for each employee who was covered under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i)(A):
OPTION 3 3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(i): The employer did not provide biological sampling at least annually, either as part of a periodic medical examination or separately as periodic biological monitoring for each employee who was covered under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i)(A):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(A): The employer's periodic medical examination did not place emphasis or include a detailed medical and work history, or update thereof, on past, present and anticipated future exposure to cadmium; smoking history and current status; reproductive history; current use of medications with potential nephrotoxic side-effects; and any history of renal, cardiovascular, respiratory, hematopoietic, and/or musculo-skeletal systems dysfunction:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(B): The employer's periodic medical examination did not place emphasis on blood pressure, the respiratory system and the urinary system:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(C): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include a 14 inch by 17 inch, or a reasonably standard sized posterior-anterior chest X-ray:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(D): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include pulmonary function tests, including forced vital capacity (FCV) and forced expiratory volume at 1 second (FEV1):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(E): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include biological monitoring as required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)4(ii)(F): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include blood analysis as required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B) and did not include blood urea nitrogen, complete blood count and serum creatinine:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(G): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include urinalysis in addition to the analysis required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B) including the determination of albumin, glucose, and total and low molecular weight proteins:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(H): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include for males over 40 years old, prostate palpation, or other at least as effective diagnostic test(s):
5 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii)(I): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include provisions for any additional tests deemed appropriate by the examining physician:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(iii): The employer did not provide periodic biological monitoring in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2)(ii)(B):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(5)(i)(A): The employer did not periodically reassess the employee's work practices and personal hygiene; the employee's respirator use, if any; the employee's smoking history and status; the respiratory protection program; the hygiene facilities; and the maintenance and effectiveness of the relevant engineering controls until the physician determined that such reassessment was no longer necessary:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(5)(i)(B): The employer did not after periodically reassessment, provide semiannual medical examinations to evaluate the abnormal clinical sign(s) of cadmium toxicity until the results were normal or the employee was medically removed from the cadmium area:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(5)(i)(C): The employer did not provide a more detailed medical evaluation of toxic effects of cadmium on the employee's renal system where the results of tests for total proteins in urine were abnormal:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(i): The employer did not provide a medical examination that included the elements specified in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(i)(A)-(D) to determine an employee's fitness for respirator use:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(i): The employer did not provide to any employee without a medical examination within the preceding 12 months, a medical examination that included the elements specified in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(i)(A)-(D) to determine an employee's fitness for respirator use prior to employee's being assigned to a job that required the use of a respirator:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(ii): The employer did not have a physician determine whether the employee was fit to wear a respirator after reviewing all the information obtained from the medical examination required in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(i):
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(iii): The employer did not, as soon as possible, provide the employee with a periodic medical examination in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii) to determine the employee's fitness to wear a respirator when- ever an employee had exhibited difficulty in breathing during a respirator fit test or during use of a respirator:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(iv): When the results of the examination required under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(i), 29 CFR 1926.63 (l)(6)(ii), or 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(iii) were abnormal, medical limitation or prohibition of respirator use was not considered:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(iv): When the employee was allowed to wear a respirator, the employee's ability to continue to do so was not periodically evaluated by a physician:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(7)(i): The employer did not provide a medical examination, as soon as possible, to any employee who could had been acutely exposed to cadmium because of an emergency in addition to the medical surveillance required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2) - (6):
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(7)(ii): The emergency examination did not include the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii) with emphasis on the respiratory system, other organ systems considered appropriate by the examining physician, and symptoms of acute overexposure, as identified in II(B)(1) - (2) and IV of Appendix A:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(1)(8)(i): The employer did not at termination of employment provide a medical examination in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4)(ii), including a chest X-ray, to any employee to whom at any prior time the employer was required to provide medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i) or 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(7):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9)(i): The employer did not provide to the examining physician a copy of 29 CFR 1926.63 and appendices:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9)(ii): The employer did not provide to the examining physician a description of the affected employee's former, current, and anticipated duties as they relate to the employee's occupational exposure to cadmium:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9)(iii): The employer did not provide to the examining physician the employee's former, current, and anticipated future levels of occupational exposure to cadmium:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9)(iv): The employer did not provide to the examining physician a description of any personal protective equipment, including respirators, used/or to be used by the employee, including when and how long the employee had used that equipment:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9)(v): The employer did not provide to the examining physician relevant results of previous biological monitoring and medical examinations:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(i): The employer did not promptly obtain a written, signed medical opinion from the examining physician for each medical examination performed on each employee:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(i)(A): The employer did not ensure that the examining physician medical opinion contained the physician's diagnosis for the employee:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(i)(B): The employer did not ensure that the examining physician's medical opinion contained the physician's opinion as to whether the employee had any detected medical condition(s) that would place the employee at increased risk of material impairment to health from future exposure to cadmium, including any indications of potential cadmium toxicity:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(i)(C): The employer did not ensure that the examining physician's medical opinion contained the results of any biological or other testing or related evaluations that directly assess the employee's absorption of cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(i)(D): The employer did not ensure that the examining physician's medical opinion contained any recommended removal from, or limitation on the activities or duties of the employee or on the employee's use of personal protective equipment, such as respirators:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(i)(E): The employer did not ensure that the examining physician's medical opinion contained a statement that the physician had clearly and carefully explained to the employee the results of the medical examination, including all biological monitoring results and any medical conditions related to cadmium exposure that required further evaluation or treatment, and any limitation on employee's diet or use of medications:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(ii): The employer did not promptly obtained a copy of the results of any biological monitoring provided by an employer to an employee independently of a medical examination under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(2) and 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(10)(iii): The employer did not instruct the physician not to reveal orally or in the written medical opinion given to the employer specific findings or diagnoses unrelated to occupational exposure to cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(i)(A): The employer did not temporarily remove an employee from work where there was excess exposure to cadmium on each occasion that medical removal was required under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3), 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4), or 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6) and/or on each occasion that a physician determines in a written medical opinion that the employee should be removed from such exposure:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(i)(C): The employer did not transfer employee to a job where the exposure to cadmium was within the permissible levels specified in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11) as soon as one became available whenever an employee was medically removed:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(i)(D): The employer did not provide follow-up medical examinations semi-annually until, in a written medical opinion, the examining physician determined that either the employee could be returned to his/her former job status or the employee had to be permanently removed from excess cadmium exposure under the provisions of 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(i):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(i)(E): The employer returned an employee who had been medically removed for any reason from his/her former job status before a physician determined in a written medical opinion that continued medical removal was no longer necessary to protect the employee's health:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(ii): The employer did not remove the employee from work where exposure to cadmium was above the PEL when an employee was found unfit to wear a respirator under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(6)(ii):
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(iii): The employer did not remove an employee from work where exposure to cadmium was at or above the action level, when removal was based on a reason other than the employee's inability to wear a respirator:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(iv): An employee who was removed because his/her level of CdU, CdB and/or B2-M exceeded the medical removal trigger levels in 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(3) or 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(4) was returned to work with exposure to cadmium at or above the action level before the employee's levels of CdU fell to or below 3 ug/g Cr, CdB fell to or below 5 ug/lwb, and B2-M fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11)(vi): The employer did not provide the same medical removal protection benefits to an employee under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(12) as would have been provided had the removal been under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(12)(i): The employer did not provide medical removal protection benefits for up to 18 months to an employee each time and while the employee was temporarily medically removed under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(11):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(12)(iii)(A): The employer did not make available to the employee a medical examination pursuant to this section in order to obtain a final medical determination as to whether the employee could be returned to his/her former job status, where, after 18 months on medical removal because of elevated biological monitoring results, the employee's monitoring results had not declined to a low enough level to permit the employee to be returned to his/her former job status:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(12)(iii)(B): The employer did not ensure that the final medical determination indicated whether the employee could be returned to his/her former job status and what steps, if any, should be taken to protect the employee's health:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(13)(ii): The employer did not promptly notify an employee of the right to seek a second medical opinion after each occasion that an initial physician provided by the employer conducted a medical examination or consultation pursuant to this section:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(15)(i): The employer did not provide a copy of the physician's written medical opinion to the examined employee within five working days after receipt thereof:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(15)(ii): The employer did not provide the employee with a copy of the employee's biological monitoring results and an explanation sheet explaining the results within five working days after receipt thereof:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(15)(iii): The employer did not provide the employee with information required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9) from the examining physician within 30 days after a request by an employee:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(16): The employer did not report any abnormal condition or disorder caused by occupational exposure to cadmium associated with employment as specified in Chapter (V)(E) of the Reporting Guidelines for Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in addition to other medical events that is required to be reported on the OSHA Form No. 200:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(1): The employer did not comply with the requirements of OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard 29 CFR 1926.59, concerning cadmium hazards, including but not limited to the requirements concerning warning signs and labels, material safety data sheets (MSDS), and employee information and training:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(2)(i): Warning signs were not provided and displayed in the regulated area:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(2)(i): Warning signs were not posted at all approaches to the regulated area so that an employee could read the signs and take necessary protective steps before entering the area:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(2)(ii): Warning signs required by 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(2)(i) did not bear the following information:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(2)(iii): The employer did not ensure that signs required by 29 CFR 1926.63(m) were illuminated, cleaned, and maintained as necessary so that the legends were readily visible:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(3)(i): Shipping and storage containers containing cadmium, cadmium compounds, or cadmium contaminated clothing, equipment, waste, scrap, or debris did not bear appropriate warning labels as specified in 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(3)(ii):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(3)(ii): Warning labels did not include at least the following information:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(3)(iii): When feasible, installed cadmium products did not have a visible label or other indication that cadmium was present:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(i): The employer did not institute a training program for all employees who were potentially exposed to cadmium, ensure employee participation in the program, and maintain a record of the contents of such program:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(ii): Employee information and training were not provided prior to or at the time of initial assignment to a job involving potential exposure to cadmium and at least annually thereafter:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii): The employer did not make the training program understandable to the employee:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(A): The employer did not ensure that the training program contained the health hazards associated with cadmium exposure, with special attention to the information incorporated in Appendix A:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(B): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the quantity, location, manner of use, release, and storage of cadmium in the workplace and specific nature of operations that could result in exposure to cadmium, especially exposure above the PEL:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(C): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the engineering controls and work practices associated with the employee's job assignment:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(D): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the measures employees could take to protect themselves from exposure to cadmium, including modification of such habits as smoking and personal hygiene, and specific procedures the employer had implemented to protect employees from exposure to cadmium such as appropriate work practices, emergency procedures, and the provision of personal protective equipment:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(E): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the purpose, proper selection, fitting, proper use, and limitations of respirators and protective clothing:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(F): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the purpose and description of the medical surveillance program required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l):
1 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(G): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the contents of this section and the appendices:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iii)(H): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the employee's rights of access to records under 29 CFR 1910.20(e) and 29 CFR 1910.20 (g):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(4)(iv)(A): At no cost to the employees, the employer did not make a copy of 29 CFR 1926.63 and its appendices readily available and provide a copy when requested:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(m)(5): In a multi-employer workplace, an employer who produced, used, or stored cadmium in a manner that could expose employees of other employers to cadmium did not notify those employers of the potential hazard in accordance with the hazard communication standard 29 CFR 1926.59(e):
5 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(i): The employer did not establish and keep an accurate record of all air monitoring for cadmium in the work place:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(A): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain the monitoring date, shift, duration, and results in terms of an 8-hour TWA of each sample taken, and when cadmium was not detected, the detection level:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(B): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain the name, social security number, and job classification of the employees monitored and of other employees whose exposures the monitoring was intended to represent:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(B): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain a description of how it was determined that the employee's monitoring result could be taken to represent other employee's exposure to cadmium:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(C): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain a description of the sampling and analytical methods used and evidence of their accuracy:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(D): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain the type of respiratory protective device, if any, worn by the monitored employee and by any other employee whose exposure the monitoring result was intended to represent:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(E): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain a notation of any other conditions that could have affected the monitoring results:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(ii)(F): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain any exposure monitoring or objective data that were used and the levels:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(iii): The employer did not maintain exposure monitoring records for at least thirty (30) years, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.20:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1)(iv): The employer did not provide a copy of the results of an employee's air monitoring prescribed in 29 CFR 1926.63(d) to an industry trade association and to the employee's union, if any, or if either of such associations or unions do not exist, to another comparable organization that was competent to maintain such records and was reasonably accessible to employers and employees in the industry:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(2)(ii): The employer did not establish and maintain a record of the objective data for at least 30 years:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(i): The employer did not establish and maintain an accurate record for each employee covered by medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(1)(i):
2 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(ii)(A): The employer did not establish and maintain an accurate record on medical surveillance for each employee by name, social security number, and description of the duties:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(ii)(B): The employer's medical surveillance record for each employee did not contain a copy of the physician's written opinions and of the explanation sheet, for biological monitoring results:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(ii)(C): The employer's medical surveillance record for each employee did not contain a copy of the medical history, and the results of any physical examination and all test results that are required to be provided by this section, including biological tests, X- rays, pulmonary function tests, etc., or that have been obtained to further evaluate any condition that could be related to cadmium exposure:
1 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(ii)(D): The employer's medical surveillance record for each employee did not contain a copy of the employee's medical symptoms that could be related to exposure to cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(ii)(E): The employer's medical surveillance record for each employee did not contain a copy of the information provided to the physician as required by 29 CFR 1926.63(l)(9):
3 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(iii): The employer did not ensure that the medical surveillance record was maintained for the duration of employment plus thirty (30) years in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.20:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3)(iv): The employer did not promptly provide or update as appropriate, a copy of the employee's medical record, to a medical doctor or a union specified by the employee, at the employee's request:
OPTION 1 5 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(4): The employer did not certify that employees had been trained by preparing a certification record which included the identity of the person trained, the signature of the employer or the person who conducted the training, and the date the training was completed:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(4): The employer's certification records were not prepared at the completion of training:
OPTION 3 2 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(4): The employer's certification records for training were not maintained on file for one (1) year beyond the date of training of the employee:
3 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(5)(i): Availability access to all records required to be maintained by 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(1) - (4) was not in accordance with the provision of 29 CFR 1910.20:
4 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(5)(ii): The employer did not within 15 days after a request, make an employee's medical records required to be kept by 29 CFR 1926.63(n)(3) available for examination and copying to the subject employee, to designated representatives, to anyone having the specific written consent of the subject employee, and after the employee's death or incapacitation, to the employee's family member:
5 29 CFR 1926.63(o)(1): The employer did not provide affected employees or their designated representatives an opportunity to observe any monitoring of employee exposure to cadmium:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1926.63(o)(2): The employer did not provide the observer with clothing and equipment when observation of monitoring required entry into an area where the use of protective clothing or equipment was required:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1926.63(o)(2): The employer did not ensure that the observer used such clothing and equipment and complied with all other applicable safety and health procedures when observation of monitoring required entry into an area where the use of protective clothing or equipment was required:
1 29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees were not protected by protective helmets while working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or from falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns:
2 29 CFR 1926.100(b): Helmets for the protection of employees against impact and penetration of falling and flying objects did not meet the specifications contained in American National Standards Institute Z89.1-1969, Safety Requirements for Industrial Head Protection:
|
|
Directives - Table of Contents |
 Back to Top |
www.osha.gov | www.dol.gov |
Contact Us | Freedom of Information Act | Customer Survey Privacy and Security Statement | Disclaimers |
||
| Occupational Safety & Health Administration 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20210 |
||
