| www.OSHA.gov | |
|
Directives
CPL 02-00-032 - CPL 2.32A CH-3 - Changes to the Maritime Standard Alleged Violation Elements (SAVEs) Manual |
Directives - Table of Contents |
| • Record Type: | Instruction |
| • Directive Number: | CPL 02-00-032 |
| • Old Directive Number: | CPL 2.32A CH-3 |
| • Title: | Changes to the Maritime Standard Alleged Violation Elements (SAVEs) Manual |
| • Information Date: | 04/11/1994 |
| • Standard Number: | 1915.1027 |
|
OSHA Instruction CPL 2.32A CH-3 April 11, 1994 Office of General Industry Compliance Assistance Subject: Changes to the Maritime Standard Alleged Violation Elements (SAVEs) Manual A. Purpose. This instruction transmits revised and new pages to the Maritime 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 1915.1027 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. H. Berrien Zettler, Acting 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 OSHA Instruction CPL 2.32A CH-3 April 11, 1994 Office of General Industry Compliance Assistance 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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/m(3)), calculated as an eight-hour time-weighted average exposure (TWA):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(1)(i): Each employer of a workplace or work operation covered by this standard did not determine if any employee could be exposed to cadmium at or above the action level:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(1)(ii): Determination of employee exposure was not made from breathing zone air samples that reflect the monitored employee's regular, daily 8-hour TWA exposure to cadmium:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not determine the eight-hour TWA exposures to cadmium for each employee on the basis of one or more personal breathing zone samples reflecting full shift exposure on each shift, for each job classification, in each work area, length and duration:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(2)(i): The employer did not monitor employee exposures to cadmium and did not base initial determinations on the monitoring results:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 represent the levels of exposure of employees:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(3)(i): When the initial monitoring or periodic monitoring revealed that employee exposures were above the PEL, the employer did not monitor at a frequency and pattern needed to ensure the adequacy of respiratory selection and the effectiveness of engineering and work practice controls:
OPTION 3 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(3)(i): When the initial monitoring or periodic monitoring revealed that employee exposures were at or above the action level or PEL, the employer did not continue exposure monitoring at least every six months:
OPTION 4 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(3)(i): When the initial monitoring or periodic monitoring revealed employee exposures were at or above the action level or PEL, the employer, at a minimum, did not continue the semi-annual measurements until the conditions in 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(3)(ii) were met:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(4): The employer did not institute the exposure monitoring required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(2)(i) and 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(3) when 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 being exposed above the PEL:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(4): The employer did not institute the exposure monitoring required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(2)(i) and 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(3) when there had been a change that provided the employer a reason to suspect that additional employees were being exposed to cadmium at or above the action level or a reason to suspect that employees already exposed at or above the action level were now being exposed above the PEL:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(5)(i): Within 15 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 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(d)(5)(i): Within 15 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 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, the permissible exposure limit (PEL), and the separate engineering control air limit (SECAL):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(e)(1): The employer did not establish a regulated area wherever an employee's exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium was, or could reasonably have been expected to be, in excess of the permissible exposure limit (PEL):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(e)(2): Regulated areas established for exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium were not demarcated from the rest of the workplace in a manner that adequately establishes and alerts employees of the boundaries of the regulated area:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(e)(3): Access to regulated areas established for exposure to airborne concentrations of cadmium, was not limited to authorized persons:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027 (g)(2):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(1)(ii): In industries where a separate engineering control air limit (SECAL) had been specified for particular processes, the employer did not implement engineering and work practice controls to reduce and maintain employee exposure to cadmium at or below the SECAL:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(1)(iv): Whenever engineering and work practice controls were required and were not sufficient to reduce employee exposure to or below the PEL, or where applicable, the SECAL, the employer did not implement such controls to reduce exposures to the lowest levels achievable:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(1)(iv): 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 supplement such controls with respiratory protection that complied with the requirements of 29 CFR 1915.1027(g):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(1)(v): The employer used employee rotation as a method of compliance to reduce and maintain employee exposure to cadmium at or below the PEL or, where applicable, the SECAL:
OPTION 1 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(i): When the PEL was exceeded, the employer did not establish and implement a written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL by means of engineering and work practice controls, as required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(1):
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(i): To the extent that engineering and work practice controls did not reduce employee exposures to cadmium to or below the PEL, the employer did not include in the written compliance program the use of appropriate respiratory protection to achieve compliance with the PEL:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(A): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include a description of each operation in which cadmium was emitted:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(B): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include a description of the specific means that would be employed to achieve compliance, including engineering plans and studies used to determine methods selected for controlling exposure, as well as, where necessary, the use of appropriate respiratory protection to achieve the PEL:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(C): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include a report of the technology considered in meeting the PEL:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(D): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include air monitoring data that document the sources of cadmium emissions:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(E): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include a detailed schedule for implementation of the program, including documentation such as copies of purchase orders for equipment, construction contracts, etc.:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(F): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include a work practice program that includes items as required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(h), 29 CFR 1915.1027(i), and 29 CFR 1915.1027(j):
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(G): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL did not include a written plan for emergency situations, as specified in 29 CFR 1915.1027(h):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(ii)(H): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL was devoid of other relevant information:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(iii): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL was not reviewed and updated at least annually, or more often if necessary, to reflect significant changes in the employer's compliance status:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(2)(iv): The employer's written compliance program to reduce employee exposure to cadmium to or below the PEL was not provided upon request for examination and copying to affected employees and designated employee representatives:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(3)(i): When mechanical ventilation was used to control employee exposure to cadmium, measurements that demonstrate 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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(3)(ii): When mechanical ventilation was used to control employee exposure, 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 might result in a significant increase in employee exposure to cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(3)(iii): Air from exhaust ventilation was recirculated into the workplace and the system did not have a high efficiency filter (HEPA) and was not monitored to assure effectiveness:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(3)(iv): Procedures were not developed and implemented to minimize employee exposure to cadmium when maintenance of ventilation systems and changing of filters had been conducted:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1): Where respirators were required,the employer did not provide them at no cost to the employee, and did not ensure that they were used in compliance with the requirements of this section:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, where exposure levels to cadmium exceeded the PEL:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 was not feasible or were not required:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1)(iii): The employer did not ensure that respirators provided to the employee were used in regulated areas established for cadmium exposures, as prescribed in 29 CFR 1915.1027(e):
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1)(iv): The employer did not ensure that respirators were used where 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:
5 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1)(v): The employer did not ensure that respirators were used in emergencies involving cadmium exposures:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1)(vi): When an employee was exposed to cadmium at or above the action level, the employer did not provide a respirator when requested by the employee:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1)(vii): Respirators were not used whenever an employee was exposed to cadmium above the PEL in an industry to which a separate engineering control airborne limit (SECAL) was applicable:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(1)(viii): Respirators were not used whenever an employee was exposed to cadmium above the PEL and engineering controls were not required under 29 CFR 1915.1027(f)(1)(iii):
OPTION 1 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(2)(i): Where respirators were required the employer did not select and provide the appropriate respirator as specified in Table 2, "Respiratory Protection For Cadmium", as required under 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(2)(i):
OPTION 2 5 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, who was entitled to a respirator, who chose to use this type of respirator for protection against cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.152:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(6)(ii) and determine if the employee could wear a respirator while performing the required duties:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(3)(v): An employee was assigned a task requiring the use of a respirator for protection against cadmium exposure and based on his or her most recent examination, although the examining physician had determined that the employee would be unable to continue to function normally while wearing a respirator:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(3)(v): A physician had 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 but the limitation or removal was not in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11) and 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(12):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 is exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that do not exceed 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m(3) = 50 ug/m(3)):
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(4)(ii): Quantitative fit testing was used for a negative pressure respirator for an employee who is exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that do not exceed 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m(3) = 50 ug/m(3)) and a fit factor of at least 10 times the protection factor for that class of respirators (Table 2 in 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(2)(i)) was not achieved at testing:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 is exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that exceed 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m(3) = 50 ug/m(3)):
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(4)(iii): Quantitative fit testing for a negative pressure respirator of an employee who is exposed to airborne concentrations of cadmium that exceed 10 times the PEL (10 x 5 ug/m(3) = 50 ug/m(3)) did not achieve a fit factor of at least 10 times the protection factor for that class of respirators (Table 2 in 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(2)(i)):
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(g)(4)(iv): A fit factor that was at least 10 times the protection factor for that class of respirators (Table 2 in 29 CFR 1915.1027(g)(2)(i) was not achieved during quantitative fit testing:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(h): The employer did not develop and implement a written plan for dealing with emergency situations involving substantial releases of airborne cadmium:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(i)(1): When an employee was exposed to airborne cadmium above the PEL, or where skin or eye irritation was associated with cadmium exposure at any level, the employer did not provide at no cost to the employee and ensure that the employee used appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevented contamination of the employee and the employee's garments:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(i)(1): Where skin or eye irritation was associated with cadmium exposure at any level, the employer did not provide at no cost to the employee, and assure that employee used, appropriate protective work clothing and equipment that prevented contamination of the employee and the employee's garments:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915, Subpart I:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(j)(1):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(i)(2)(ii): The employer did not ensure that no employees took cadmium-contaminated protective clothing or equipment from the workplace:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 designed to prevent dispersion of cadmium dust:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027 (m)(3):
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide the protective clothing and equipment required by 29 CFR 1915 .1027(i)(1) in a clean and dry condition as often as necessary to maintain its effectiveness against airborne cadmium:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(i)(3)(i): The employer did not provide the protective clothing and equipment required by 29 CFR 1915 .1027(i)(1) for protection against airborne cadmium in a clean and dry condition at least weekly:
OPTION 1 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 disperse cadmium into the air:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915 .1027(c):
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(i)(3)(v): The employer did not inform any person who launders or cleans 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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.97:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, which are designed to prevent dispersion of cadmium and contamination of the employee's street clothes:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(j)(3)(i): The employer did not ensure that employees who were exposed to cadmium above the PEL, showered at the end of the work shift:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
OPTION 1 5 29 CFR 1915.1027(j)(4)(i): The employer did not ensure that the lunchroom facilities were readily accessible to employees:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(j)(4)(i): The employer did not ensure that tables for eating were maintained free of cadmium:
OPTION 3 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(j)(4)(i): The employer did not ensure that no employee in a lunchroom was exposed at any time to cadmium at or above a concentration of 2.5 ug/m(3):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(j)(4)(ii): The employer did not ensure that employees do not enter lunchroom facilities with protective work clothing or equipment:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(k)(1): All surfaces were not maintained as free as practical of accumulations of cadmium:
5 29 CFR 1915.1027(k)(2): All spills and sudden releases of material containing cadmium were not cleaned up as soon as possible:
6 29 CFR 1915.1027(k)(3): Surfaces contaminated with cadmium were not cleaned by vacuuming or other methods that minimized the likelihood of cadmium becoming airborne, wherever possible:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(k)(4): HEPA-filtered vacuuming equipment or equally effective filtration methods were not used for vacuuming of cadmium dust:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(k)(4): Vacuuming equipment was not used and emptied in a manner that minimized the reentry of cadmium into the workplace:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(k)(6): Compressed air was used to remove cadmium from a surface:
OPTION 1 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 5 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027 (m)(3):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i)(B): The employer did not institute a medical surveillance program for all employees who prior to the effective date of this section could previously have been exposed to cadmium at or above the action level:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(ii): The employer did not provide the limited medical examination specified in 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(6) to determine an employee's fitness for using a respirator:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(iii): The employer did not ensure that the all medical examinations and procedures required by 29 CFR 1915.1027 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, and laboratory selection in appendix F, and the questionnaire of appendix D:
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(iii): The employer did not provide without cost to the employee and at a time and place that was reasonable and convenient to the employees, all examinations and procedures required by 29 CFR 1915.1027:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(iv): 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 (beta(2)-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 (beta(2)-M) taken from employees was performed in laboratories with demonstrated proficiency for that particular analyte:
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(i): The employer did not provide an initial (preplacement) examination to all employees covered by the medical surveillance program required in 29 CFR 1915 .1027(l)(1)(i):
OPTION 2 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(i): The employer did not provide an employee covered by the medical surveillance program required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i) an examination within 30 days after initial assignment to a job with exposure to cadmium:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(A): The initial (preplacement) medical examination did not include 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 musculoskeletal system dysfunction; current usage of medication with potential nephrotoxic side- effects; and smoking history and current status:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B)(1): The initial (preplacement) medical examination did not include biological monitoring that includes tests for cadmium in urine (CdU), standardized to grams of creatinine (g/Cr):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B)(2): The initial (preplacement) medical examination did not include biological monitoring that includes beta-2 microglobulin in urine (beta(2)-M), standardized to grams of creatinine (g/Cr), with pH specified as described in appendix F:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B)(3): The initial (preplacement) medical examination did not include biological monitoring that includes tests for cadmium in blood CdB) standardized to liters of whole blood (lwb):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(i)(A): The employer did not provide the minimum level of periodic medical surveillance in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(i) for currently exposed employee who was subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i)(A), when the monitoring tests showed the employee's CdU level to be at or below 3 ug/g Cr, beta(2)-M level to be at or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level to be at or below 5 ug/lwb:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(i)(B): The employer did not provide biological monitoring for CdU, beta(2)-M, and CdB within one year after initial biological monitoring and then comply with the requirements of 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(v) for previously exposed employee who was subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i)(B), when the results of initial biological monitoring tests showed the employee's CdU level to be at or below 3 ug/g Cr, beta(2)-M level to be at or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level to be at or below 5 ug/lwb:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(A)(1): The employer did not reassess the work practices and personal hygiene of an employee who was subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i) within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test results showing the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of beta(2)-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb:
OPTION 1 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(A)(2): The employer did not reevaluate the respirator use, if any, of an employee who was subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(1)(i) within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test results showing the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of beta(2)-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(A)(3): The employer did not reevaluate the respirator program within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test results for an employee subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915 .1027(l)(1)(i) showing the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of beta(2)-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(A)(4): The employer did not reevaluate the maintenance and effectiveness of the relevant engineering controls within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test results for an employee subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i) showing the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of beta(2)-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(A)(5): The employer did not assess the history and status of smoking of an employee who was subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(1)(i) within two weeks after receipt of biological monitoring test results for the employee showing the level of CdU to exceed 3 ug/g Cr, the level of beta(2)-M to exceed 300 ug/g Cr, or the level of CdB to exceed 5 ug/lwb:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(B): The employer did not within 30 days after the exposure reassessment, specified in 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027 (l)(4)(ii):
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(C)(1): The employer did not provide biological monitoring in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B) or on a semiannual basis until the employee's CdU level falls to or below 3 ug/g Cr, beta(2)-M level falls to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level falls to or below 5 ug/lwb when the physician determined that medical removal was not necessary:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(C)(2): The employer did not provide annual medical examinations in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii) until the employee's CdU level falls to or below 3 ug/g Cr, beta(2)-M level falls to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level falls to or below 5 ug/lwb when the physician determined that medical removal was not necessary:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(iii): The employer did not comply with the requirements of 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(A) and 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(ii)(B) for all employees subject to medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 beta(2)-M to be in excess of 1,500 ug/g Cr:
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(iii): 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 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii):
OPTION 3 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(iii): The employer did not medically remove the employee remove the employee from exposure to cadmium at or above the action level when the initial biological monitoring results and the biological monitoring results obtained during the medical examination both showed that, CdU exceeds 15 ug/g Cr; or CdB exceeds 15 ug/lwb; or beta(2)-M exceeds 1500 ug/g Cr, and in addition CdU exceeds 3 ug/g Cr or CdB exceeds 5 ug/liter of whole blood:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, beta(2)-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(iii)(B): The employer did not provide biological monitoring in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, beta(2)-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3)(iii)(C): The employer did not provide semiannual medical examinations in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, beta(2)-M level fell to or below 300 ug/g Cr, and CdB level fell to or below 5 ug/lwb:
OPTION 1 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(1)(i)(A):
OPTION 2 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(i): The employer did not provide periodic medical examination within one year after the initial examination required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2) and thereafter at least biennially for each employee who was covered under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i)(A):
OPTION 3 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(1)(i)(A):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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, any history of renal, cardiovascular, respiratory, hematopoietic, and/or musculoskeletal systems dysfunction:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii)(B): The employer's periodic medical examination did not place emphasis on blood pressure, the respiratory system and the urinary system:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii)(E): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include biological monitoring as required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B):
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii)(F): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include blood analysis as required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B) and did not include blood urea nitrogen, complete blood count and serum creatinine:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii)(G): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include urinalysis in addition to the analysis required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B) including the determination of albumin, glucose, and total and low molecular weight proteins:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii)(I): The employer's periodic medical examination did not include the additional tests deemed appropriate by the examining physician:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 determines they are no longer necessary:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(5)(i)(B): The employer did not within 30 days after the reassessment, take all reasonable steps to correct the deficiencies found in the reassessment that could be responsible for the employee's excess exposure to cadmium:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(5)(i)(C): The employer did not after 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:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(5)(i)(D): 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 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(i): The employer did not provide a medical examination that included the elements specified in 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(i)(A)-(D) to determine an employee's fitness for respirator use:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(i): The employer did not provide a medical examination that included the elements specified in 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(i)(A)-(D) to determine an employee's fitness for respirator prior to employee's being assigned to a job that requires the use of a respirator and to any employee without a medical examination within the preceding 12 months:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027 (l)(6)(i):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(iii): The employer did not, as soon as possible, provide the employee with a periodic medical examination in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4)(ii) to determine the employee's fitness to wear a respirator when- ever an employee has exhibited difficulty in breathing during a respirator fit test or during use of respirator:
OPTION 1 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(iv): The employer did not consider medical limitation or prohibition of respirator use when the results of the examination required by 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(6)(i), 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(ii) or 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(6)(iii) were abnormal:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(iv): When the employee was allowed to wear a respirator the employer did not have a physician periodically evaluate the employee's ability for continued use:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(7)(i): The employer did not provide a medical examination, as soon as possible, to any employee who could have been acutely exposed to cadmium because of an emergency in addition to the medical surveillance required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2-6):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(7)(ii): Emergency medical examination did not include the requirements of 29 CFR 1915.1027 (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 paragraphs II(B)(1-2) and IV of Appendix A:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(8)(i): The employer did not at termination of employment provide a medical examination in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(1)(i) or 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(7):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(9)(i): The employer did not provide to the examining physician a copy of this standard and appendices:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(9)(v): The employer did not provide to the examining physician relevant results of previous biological monitoring and medical examinations:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(10)(i)(A): The employer did not ensure that the examining physician's medical opinion contained the physician's diagnosis for the employee:
5 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(10)(ii): The employer did not promptly obtain a copy of the results of any biological monitoring provided by an employer to an employee independently of a medical examination under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2) and 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(3), 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4), or 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(11)(i)(B): The employer did not medically remove an employee in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11) regardless of whether at the time of removal a job was available into which the removed employee could be transferred:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(i)(C): The employer did not transfer the removed employee to a job where the exposure to cadmium was within the permissible levels specified in 29 CFR 1915 .1027(l)(11) as soon as one became available:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(i)(D): The employer did not provide follow-up biological monitoring in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(2)(ii)(B) at least every three months and follow-up medical examinations semi-annually at least every six months until in a written medical opinion the examining physician determined that either the employee can be returned to his/her former job status as specified under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(iv) and 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(v) or the employee must be permanently removed from excess cadmium exposure when any employee was medically removed under the provisions of 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(i):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(i)(E): The employer returned an employee who had been medically removed to 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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(ii): The employer did not remove an employee from work where exposure to cadmium was above the PEL when the employee was found unfit to wear a respirator under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(6)(ii):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(iii): The employer did not remove the employee from work where exposure to cadmium was at or above the action level when removal was based on some reason other than the employee's inability to wear a respirator:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(iv): An employee who was removed because his/her level of CdU, CdB and/or beta(2)-M exceeded the medical removal trigger levels in 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(3) or 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(4) was returned to work with exposure to cadmium at or above the action level before the employee's levels of CdU had fallen to or below 3 ug/g Cr, CdB had fallen to or below 5 ug/lwb, and beta(2)-M falls to or below 300 ug/g Cr:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(vi): The employer, although not required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(i), 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(11)(ii), or 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(iii) to do so, removed an employee from exposure to cadmium or otherwise placed limitations on an employee due to the effects of cadmium exposure on the employee's medical condition and did not provide the same medical removal protection benefits to that employee under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(12) as would have been provided had the removal been required under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(i), 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(ii), or 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11)(iii):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(12)(i): The employer did not provide medical removal protection benefits (MRPB) for up to 18 months to an employee each time and while the employee was temporarily medically removed under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(11):
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 or must be permanently removed from excess cadmium exposure, where, after 18 months on medical removal because of elevated biological monitoring results, the employee's monitoring results have not declined to a low enough level to permit the employee to be returned to his/her former job status:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(12)(iii)(B): The employer did not ensure that the final medical determination indicates 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, where, after 18 months on medical removal because of elevated biological monitoring results, the employee's monitoring results have not declined to a low enough level to permit the employee to be returned to his/her former job status:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 conducts a medical examination or consultation pursuant to this section:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 two weeks after receipt thereof:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(15)(iii): The employer did not provide the employee with information required by 29 CFR 1915.1027 (l)(9) from the examining physician within 30 days after a request by an employee:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 was required to be reported on the OSHA Form No. 200:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(1): The employer did not comply with the requirements of OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard 29 CFR 1915.1200 in communicating concerns of 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 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(2)(i): Warning signs were not provided and displayed in the regulated area:
OPTION 2 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(2)(ii): Warning signs required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(2)(i) did not bear the following information:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(2)(iii): The employer did not ensure that signs required by 29 CFR 1915.1027(m) were illuminated, cleaned, and maintained as necessary so that the legend was readily visible:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(m)(3)(ii):
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(3)(ii): The warning labels did not include at least the following information:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(3)(iii): Installed cadmium products did not have a visible label or other indication when feasible that cadmium was present:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(4)(i): The employer did not institute a training program for all employees who are potentially exposed to cadmium, ensure employee participation in the program, and maintain a record of the contents of such program:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
5 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(4)(iii): The employer did not make the training program understandable to the employee:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(4)(iii)(A): The employer did not ensure that the employee's training program contained the health hazards associated with cadmium exposure, with special attention to the information incorporated in Appendix A:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(4)(iii)(D): The employer did not ensure the employees were informed of the measures employees can 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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915 .1027(l):
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(4)(iii)(G): The employer did not ensure the employee's were informed of the contents of this section and the appendices:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(4)(iii)(H): The employer did not ensure the employee was informed of the rights of access to records under 29 CFR 1915.20(e) and 29 CFR 1915.20 (g):
5 29 CFR 1915.1027(m)(iv)(A): The employer did not make a copy of this section and its appendices readily available at no cost to all effected employees and provide them a copy when requested:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(1)(i): The employer did not establish and keep an accurate record of all air monitoring for cadmium in the work place:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(1)(ii)(A): The employer's air monitoring records did not contain the monitoring date, duration , and results in terms of an 8-hour TWA of each sample taken:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(n)(1)(iii): The employer did not maintain exposure monitoring record for at least thirty (30) years, in accordance with 29 CFR 1915.20:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(2)(ii): The employer did not establish and maintain a record of the objective data for at least 30 years:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(3)(i): The employer did not establish and maintain an accurate record for each employee covered by medical surveillance under 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(1)(i):
5 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 an explanation sheet for biological monitoring results:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(l)(9)(ii) - 29 CFR 1915.1027(l)(9)(v):
OPTION 1 1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 2 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(4): The employer's certification records were not prepared at the completion of training:
OPTION 3 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(4): The employer's certification records for training were not maintained on file for one (1) year beyond the date of training of that employee:
4 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(5)(i): Access to all records required to be maintained by 29 CFR 1915.1027(n)(i) - 29 CFR 1915.1027 (n)(4) was not in accordance with the provision of 29 CFR 1915.20:
1 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 1915.1027(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:
2 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 3 29 CFR 1915.1027(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 4 29 CFR 1915.1027(o)(2): The employer did not ensure that the observer used such clothing and equipment and complies 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:
|
|
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 |
||
