Background
During the response and recovery phases
to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma in 2005 and 2006, OSHA
monitored work activities, visited staging areas and work
sites, and investigated eighteen work-related deaths.
OSHA’s workplace
monitoring activities were captured and reported in internal
Situation Reports (SitReps). The information below summarizes
the data contained in the SitReps received from Region 4, including
Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi, from August 31, 2005 to
March 10, 2006. This report summarizes the 129 SitReps, which
contained approximately 4,000 entries that described employees
exposed to hazardous situations. The entries describe over
9,500 interventions made by OSHA. Many entries describe multiple
interventions. Interventions ranged from providing literature
and guidance to individual employees and employers, to having
employers remove employees from imminently dangerous situations.
Limitations and Disclaimer
The Matrix does not provide an in-depth analysis of OSHA standards and regulations and cannot address all hazards. It does not increase or diminish any OSHA requirement or employer obligation under those requirements. It is intended as a guide and quick reference for employers and response and recovery workers. The Matrix captures major activities involved in hurricane response and recovery, highlights many of the hazards associated with them, and recommends "best practices." Employers must evaluate the specific hazards associated with the job/operation at the site where the work is being performed.
Employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace for their employees. OSHA's role is to assure the safety and health of America's workers by setting and enforcing standards; providing training, outreach, and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging continual improvement in workplace safety and health.
The Hazard Exposure and Risk Assessment Matrix for Hurricane Response and Recovery Work provides a general overview of particular topics related to current OSHA standards. It does not alter or determine compliance responsibilities in OSHA standards or the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, or the equivalent State Plan standards and requirements. Because interpretations and enforcement policy may change over time, you should consult current OSHA/State Plan administrative interpretations and decisions by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and the courts for additional guidance on OSHA compliance requirements. Employers should modify their procedures as appropriate when additional, relevant information becomes available.
Activities Most Frequently Referenced in SitReps
Figure I shows the breakdown of the most commonly noted activities described in these SitReps.
The activities where interventions were conducted most frequently
include:
The following sections organize the information about work
site hazards captured in the SitReps submitted by Region 4
(Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi) between August 31, 2005
and March 10, 2006. The information is organized and presented
in two ways:
- Hazards most frequently identified in the SitReps for all
of the interventions documented.
- Hazards most frequently identified for the each of the
eight activities listed above.
The activities and hazards that OSHA documented in the SitReps
evaluated generally were not unique to hurricane response and
recovery. In many cases, these activities routinely occur in
other industrial and occupational settings and the hazards
are well recognized by the employers and employees that conduct
them. Nevertheless, the information summarized below suggests
that many employers either did not properly evaluate hazards
and implement controls, or did not require employees to use
them. For example, OSHA observed tree clearance crews working
in aerial lifts without fall protection. Aerial lifts are used
at many work sites to trim trees and fall protection is a required
exposure control. OSHA also observed that personal protective
equipment (PPE) use was lacking for many recognized hazards.
For example, hearing protection was not used during jobs where
noise exposures are common such as heavy equipment operations.
The information summarized below appears to indicate that
many employers may not implement recognized work practices
or require the use of PPE routinely at work sites. Conditions
after a hurricane can create additional risk for many reasons
including the loss of basic infrastructure (e.g., power, roads,
water, food/hotel service), the large amount of debris in roads
and work areas, the large number of response and recovery workers who are not familiar
with the area, and the volume and wide range of operations
conducted at close range to one another. The use of well-established
safety and health work practices and exposure controls is even
more critical under these conditions.
OSHA includes
recommended exposure controls, including work practices and
PPE, for response and recovery operations throughout the Matrix.
These exposure controls appear in the General Recommendations document
as well as in the individual activity sheets for specific jobs
and operations. Employers can include this information in existing
and future Job Hazard Analyses and standard operating practices
for the activities they perform routinely and those they anticipate
performing during future recovery efforts. Employers and response and recovery workers
can use this information to improve operations and prepare
for future recovery operations, by implementing the recommended
work practices, selecting and using recommended PPE, and providing training
on how to conduct current operations safely.
Summary of Hazards Most Frequently Observed
This section discusses the hazards most
frequently identified during hurricane-related response and
recovery activities in Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi, based
on keywords identified in SitRep entries. Because OSHA frequently
observed work locations where multiple, related hazards were
present, there may be significant overlap in the data for the
individual hazards identified. For example, in a category where
50% of the entries mention fall hazards and 40% of the entries
mention scaffolding, the percentages reported for each hazard
overlap because the hazards are related. In addition, only
data from Region 4 was analyzed, so the data provided below
do not represent OSHA’s
experience from the entire response and recovery effort. In
spite of these two limitations, the data provide a useful catalog
of the most common hazards observed during the initial six
months of hurricane disaster response and recovery operations.
It can be used by employers and response and recovery workers to plan for future
disaster response and recovery.
Table I-1 shows the top five hazards observed. As noted above,
these hazards are not unique to disaster response and recovery.
They are frequently associated with the activities during which
they were observed (e.g., work zone safety and tree trimming
in a right-of-way near a road). While each hazard is briefly
described below, the overall message is that employers should
conduct job hazard analyses (JHAs) that address both safety
and health hazards, ensure that employees understand the hazards
associated with the job, provide the necessary equipment, including
PPE, to perform the job safely, and ensure that employees use the
controls provided. (OSHA's Website provides additional assistance on
developing JHAs.)
Table I-1: Summary of Top Hazards Observed in All Response
and Recovery Activities
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentages of Sites or Visits |
Work zone safety concerns |
40% |
PPE was missing or used
improperly |
35% |
Potential fall hazard/inadequate
fall protection |
35% |
Risk of being struck-by
object, equipment, or vehicle |
20% |
Improper use of aerial
lifts |
15% |
- Work zone safety concerns were highest at 40%: Many entries
involved tree trimming or electrical line repair on or
near roads. The entries often noted inadequate cones and
other barriers at a work zone, improper use or lack of
traffic control signs (e.g., directional arrows, flaggers
with stop/slow signs), employees standing in areas where
they were exposed to oncoming traffic, and lack of use
of ANSI-approved high-visibility safety apparel such as
vests and gloves. Employers need to ensure that employees
establish work zones and traffic controls where multiple
pieces of heavy equipment, vehicles, and employees are in
close proximity. Work zones must be well marked with barriers,
cones, signs, and flaggers to provide plenty of warning
and appropriate direction to approaching vehicles.
- Improper use or lack of personal protective equipment
(PPE) (35%):
- Roughly 65% of the PPE entries reference a lack of face and head protection, or the improper use of PPE.
Entries indicated that individuals were not using goggles,
hard hats, or face shields when those types of PPE were
necessary.
- Other types of PPE commonly
mentioned include hand protection (e.g., use of reinforced
gloves during the handling of debris or insulating
gloves when working around electrical lines), hearing
protection, and body protection (e.g., chaps to protect
the worker’s legs
when operating a chainsaw or ANSI-approved high-visibility
vests in high traffic areas).
- Approximately 15% of all
the entries discussed
fall protection use while operating aerial lifts. See
next bullet.
Employers should ensure that the job hazard assessment (JHA)
for each response and recovery task identifies the PPE needed
for employee protection. Employers must provide properly fitting
PPE to employees, train them how to use it, and ensure they
use it when performing the task. Employers should use the
information in this document and the recommendations in the
individual activity sheets to identify job hazards that may
require PPE use and to select appropriate PPE for employees.
- Fall hazard/inadequate fall protection (35%): Common
examples included using ladders that were not properly
secured or that did not extend three feet above the landing;
structures such as towers used in debris removal sites
or scaffolds that did not have adequate guardrails; and
individuals not properly protected from falls when on roofs,
handling debris on trucks, or using aerial lifts to trim
trees or repair utilities. Entries frequently mentioned
lack of or improper use of fall protection equipment (i.e.,
harnesses, lanyards, connectors, and suitable anchorage
points) where such equipment was required. Employers must
identify potential fall hazards associated with a task
and ensure that these hazards are addressed through controls
such as guardrails, a safety monitoring system that includes
monitors and warning lines, and/or fall protection equipment.
- Aerial Lifts and Fall Protection: Approximately 15%
of all the entries discussed fall protection
and other PPE use while operating aerial lifts. Almost
all of the entries identified a lack of or improper use
of fall protection equipment by operators. Employers
need to ensure that employees comply with the requirements
of 29 CFR 1926.453 including the use of a properly anchored
harness for fall protection (or body belt for tethering
or restraint use only). For additional information on
the use of aerial lifts, users should see the Use of Aerial Lifts activity sheet.
- Struck-by another object (20%): Hazards mentioned included
materials falling from roofs, and materials falling while
being moved by heavy equipment such as dump trucks, cranes,
or grapplers. Employers need to ensure that appropriate
precautions are taken such as securing equipment on elevated
surfaces, using spotters around heavy equipment, and precluding
employees from entering debris-handling zones are taken.
Employers must train employees to recognize and avoid these
hazards and wear hard hats where overhead hazards exist.
Summary of the Hazards Observed During Specific Activities
Using information pulled from the same set of SitReps, this
section highlights the hazards documented most frequently
during the eight hurricane recovery tasks OSHA personnel
observed most often:
Exposure controls to protect response and recovery workers from the hazards that
are common among these activities are identified at the end
of this section.
Roof Inspection, Tarping, and Repair
Fatalities associated with this activity: Three employee fatalities occurred during Roof Inspection, Tarping, and Repair activities associated with hurricane
response and recovery operations (August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006). Two people were killed when they, in separate incidents,
fell through holes in the roofs they were repairing. A third
person died when he fell to the ground.
Hazards documented during this activity:
Table I-2: Hazards Frequently Documented During Hurricane-Related
Roof Inspection, Tarping, and Repair Operations
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
Fall protection hazards |
80% |
Improper or unsafe use
of ladders or scaffolding |
35% |
PPE was missing or used
improperly |
30% |
Electrical hazards |
15% |
Table I-2 shows the four hazards most frequently identified
in the SitRep entries for Roof Inspection, Tarping, and Repair activities:
- Fall protection hazards (missing harness, improperly
used harness, etc.) (80%): Entries noted that safety-monitoring
systems were not established and that fall protection
(harnesses, lanyards, lifelines, connectors, anchorages,
and anchorage points) was not used or was used improperly
where such equipment was required.
- Improper/unsafe use of ladders or scaffold (35%): Entries
noted that ladders were not tied off (to prevent shifting),
where not protected at the base from being struck-by
passing traffic, and were not extended three or more
feet above the landing surface. Nearly a quarter of the
entries in this group discuss scaffolding. Scaffolding
entries involved missing guardrails (fall protection
(above)), working levels that were not completely planked,
and scaffolds that were not braced and secured properly.
- PPE (25%): The PPE specifically noted included inadequate
face and head protection.
- Electrical hazards (15%): Entries noted that employees
did not maintain adequate separation distances from uninsulated
energized power lines and were not protected from electrical
shock when using power tools to repair roofs (e.g., using
electrical power tools without the use of ground-fault
circuit interrupters). Employers and employees need to
ensure that grounding equipment (e.g., insulating blankets)
is installed by electric utility personnel or adequate
separation distance is maintained when working near power
lines. Employers also need to ensure that power tools are
protected by ground-fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs)
or are double insulated, or need to implement an assured
equipment grounding program.
- For additional precautions employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations section and
to the Roof Inspection, Tarping, and Repair; and the Restoring Electrical Utilities activity sheets.
Debris Collection and Removal
Fatalities associated with this activity: Two
employee fatalities occurred during debris collection and
removal activities associated with hurricane response
and recovery operations (August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006).
One person was struck by an out-of-control vehicle that
entered a properly controlled and well marked work zone.
An equipment operator was killed when his tractor overturned
into a ditch and pinned him underwater.
Hazards documented during this activity:
Table I-3: Hazards Frequently Documented During Hurricane-Related
Debris Collection and Removal Activities
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
Work zone safety hazards |
65% |
PPE was missing or
used improperly |
40% |
Risk of being struck-by object, equipment, or vehicle |
35% |
Table I-3 shows the three hazards most frequently documented
in the SitRep entries for Debris Collection and Removal
activities:
- Work zone safety (65%): These typically involved
situations where employees were not adequately protected
from oncoming traffic or heavy equipment movement.
The most common issues mentioned were missing signs
or cones.
- PPE-related concerns (40%): The most common concerns
documented were lack of face and head protection (e.g.,
goggles and hard hats), hand protection (e.g., reinforced
leather gloves for handling tools and sharp debris),
hearing protection, and body protection (e.g., chaps
when working with chain saws and ANSI-approved high-visibility
vests for use in areas where traffic controls are needed).
- Struck-by hazards (35%): This commonly involved employees
not being adequately protected from falling debris
during heavy equipment use (e.g., hauling or pushing
materials using bulldozers, front-end loaders, or dump
trucks). Employers need to ensure that spotters are
used when the visibility of heavy equipment operators
is restricted and preclude employees from entering areas
where debris is handled or can fall from heavy equipment.
Employees need to keep a safe distance from heavy machinery,
and maintain proper traffic controls near roadways.
- For additional precautions employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations section
and to the Debris Collection and the Work Zone Safety and Traffic Control within a Work
Area activity sheets.
Tree Trimming
Fatalities associated with this activity: No
employee fatalities were reported during tree trimming activities
associated with hurricane response and recovery operations
(August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006).
Hazards documented during this activity:
Table I-4: Hazards Frequently Documented During Hurricane-Related
Tree Trimming Operations
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
PPE was missing or used
improperly |
55% |
Work zone safety hazards |
45% |
Chainsaw-related hazards |
30% |
Fall protection used
improperly |
20% |
Table I-4 shows the four hazards most frequently documented
in the SitRep entries for Tree Trimming operations.
- PPE-related concerns (55%): Entries
described situations where PPE was not used, PPE was used
improperly, or PPE was available but employees were not
required to use it or were not aware that it was necessary.
Inadequate face, head, and body protection were noted
in over half of the entries; inadequate hand protection
and hearing protection were each noted in over one-quarter
of the entries.
- Work zone safety (45%): Entries
describe issues involving work zone safety concerns with
most noting lack of cones or signs.
- Chainsaw-related hazards (30%):
Hazards noted included the inadequate training of employees
and unsafe operation of chainsaws. Employers need to ensure
that employees inspect the saws before use, plan the cut
to safely ground the tree or pieces of the tree, and safely
use the chain saw by not cutting overhead or moving long
distances without engaging the brake.
- Fall protection (20%): Approximately
75% of these fall protection entries involved the lack
of or improper use of fall protection equipment while
operating aerial lifts.
- For additional precautions employers
and employees should refer to the Recommendations section
and the Tree Trimming, Work Zone Safety and Traffic Control within a Work Area, and Use of Aerial Lifts activity sheets.
Restoring Electrical Utilities
Fatalities associated with this activity:
Three employee fatalities occurred during electrical
utility restoration associated with hurricane response
and recovery operations (August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006).
One person was struck by a 75-foot utility pole that
fell when it was being positioned with a forklift.
One person was electrocuted when he contacted a live
110-volt line that he was attaching to a house. One
person suffered fatal burns when the electrical system
being restored became energized, exploded, and
caused a flash fire.
Hazards documented during this activity:
Table I-5: Hazards Frequently Documented During Hurricane-Related
Electrical Utility Restoration Operations
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
Work zone safety
hazards |
40% |
PPE was missing
or used improperly |
20% |
Fall hazards |
25% |
Shock or electrocution
hazard |
25% |
Table I-5 shows the four hazards documented most frequently
in SitRep entries for Electrical Utilities Restoration
operations.
- Work zone safety (40%): Entries describe issues
involving work zone safety concerns with most noting
lack of cones or signs.
- PPE concerns (20%): Face/head protection and hand
protection were each mentioned in approximately one-quarter
of the PPE entries.
- Fall hazards (25%): Over half of these entries
involved aerial lifts, while another quarter involved
improper use of ladders or scaffolds. The aerial
lift hazard most frequently noted was the lack or improper
use of fall protection equipment by employees in
aerial lifts; most often this involved employees who
did not properly anchor their fall protection equipment
when working from an aerial lift. Ladder and scaffold
hazards most frequently involved ladders that could
shift because they were not properly tied off at
the top or did not have their bases protected from
being struck by passing traffic.
- Shock or electrocution hazards (25%): Commonly
referenced observations included inadequate protection
from contact with live electrical equipment during
repairs including an improper use of insulating and
grounding equipment and electrically protective PPE.
Only 1910.269 qualified employees shall conduct electrical
power restoration activities. Ensure that power lines
are deenergized whenever possible. In addition,
install temporary grounds to protect employees against
inadvertent energizing of power lines. Use insulating
protective equipment and PPE as needed around power
lines.
- For additional precautions employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations section
and to the Restoring Electrical Utilities,
Work Zone Safety and Traffic Control within a Work Area, and the Use of Aerial Lifts activity
sheets.
Debris Reduction, Recycling, and Disposal
Fatalities associated with this activity:
Two
employee fatalities occurred during debris reduction,
recycling, and disposal activities associated with
hurricane response and recovery operations (August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006). One person was killed when he was
struck by a bulldozer at a debris reduction site. One
operator was killed when his excavator rolled down
the debris pile he was working on.
Table I-6: Hazards Frequently Documented During Hurricane-Related
Debris Reduction, Recycling, and Disposal Activities
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
PPE was missing
or used improperly |
50% |
Work zone safety
hazards |
45% |
Fall hazards |
15% |
Table I-6 shows the three hazards documented most
frequently in the SitRep entries for Debris Reduction,
Recycling, and Disposal activities.
- PPE concerns (50%): The most common issues involved
lack of required hard hats (mentioned in over half
of the entries on PPE) and inadequate respiratory
protection and hearing protection (each referenced
in one-quarter of the entries for this group).
- Work zone safety (45%): These hazards are consistent
with the large amounts of heavy equipment used at
locations that handle debris.
- Fall hazards (15%): Specific SitRep entries described
individuals standing on top of large piles of debris
(often in truck beds) without fall protection equipment
and employees in observation towers with inadequate
hand and guardrails.
- For additional precautions employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations and to the Debris Reduction, Recycling, and Disposal and the Work Zone Safety and Traffic Control within a Work Area activity sheets.
Assessment, Cleanup, and Repair of Structures
Fatalities associated with this activity:
Two
employee fatalities occurred between August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006 during the assessment, cleanup, and repair of structures
damaged by the hurricanes. One employee received an electrical
shock when the knife he was using contacted a power
line and he fell 18 feet. Another employee was killed
when he was struck by a falling security gate that
was damaged during a hurricane.
Table I-7: Hazards Frequently Documented During Hurricane-Related
Assessment, Cleanup, and Repair of Structures
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
Fall hazards |
60% |
Improper use of
ladders and/or scaffolds |
50% |
PPE was missing
or used improperly |
30% |
Risk of being struck-by object, equipment, or vehicle |
25% |
Table I-7 shows the four hazards documented most frequently
in the SitRep entries for Assessment, Cleanup, and
Repair of Structures.
- Fall Protection/Fall Hazards (60%): Entries in
this group cited fall hazards or improper use of
fall protection controls or equipment.
- Ladder and Scaffolding
Use (50%): Many of these entries mention not properly
protecting the ladder from shifting by tying it
off, inadequately protecting a ladder’s base
from being struck by passing traffic, and not extending
that ladder three or more feet above the landing
surface. Scaffolding entries involved employees not
adequately protected from falls by guardrails,
and scaffolds without proper planking and adequate
support.
- PPE issues (30%): Face and head protection (such
as goggles and hard hats) were cited in around 80%
of the entries in this group; hand protection was
cited in roughly 25% of these entries.
- Struck-by hazards (25%): Entries noted employees
at risk for being struck-by objects such as construction
materials.
- For additional precautions, employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations section
and to the Assessment, Cleanup, and Repair of Structures activity sheet.
Restoring Communications Systems
Fatalities associated with this activity:
Two
employee fatalities occurred between August 31, 2005 and March 21, 2006 during the repair of communication systems damaged
by hurricanes. One cable television repairman was
electrocuted when he contacted a live electrical
line three feet above the cable line he was working
on. Another telecommunications employee was found
dead near a ladder that was placed against a telephone
pole.
Table I-8: Hazards Frequently Documented During
Hurricane-Related Communication System Restoration
Activities
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
Work zone safety
hazards |
55% |
Hazards associated
with use of aerial lifts |
40% |
Fall hazards |
25% |
PPE was missing
or used improperly |
10% |
Table I-8 shows the four hazards most frequently
documented in the SitRep entries for the Restoration
of Communication Systems.
- Work zone safety (55%): Hazards involved situations
where employees were not adequately protected from
oncoming traffic. The most common issues mentioned
were missing signs or cones.
- Use of Aerial Lifts (40%): Over half of these
entries noted the lack or improper use of fall
protection equipment by employees in aerial lifts.
Most often this involved employees who did not properly
anchor their fall protection equipment when working
from an aerial lift.
- 25% of all entries for this activity discuss
potential fall hazards or lack of fall protection.
Almost all of these entries involve the improper
use of fall protection equipment during use of
aerial lifts.
- PPE issues (10%): The PPE hazard most frequently
noted included improper face and head protection
(e.g., goggles and hard hats) and hand protection.
- For additional precautions employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations section
and to the Restoring Communications Systems,
Work Zone Safety and Traffic Controls within
a Work Area, and the Use of Aerial Lifts activity
sheets.
Restoring Water and Sewer Services
Fatalities associated with this activity: No
employee fatalities were reported during water and
sewer service restoration operations associated
with hurricane response and recovery operations
(August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006).
Hazards documented during this activity:
Table I-9: Hazards Frequently Documented During
Hurricane-Related Sewer and Water Service Restoration
Activities
Description
of Hazard or Observation |
Approximate
Percentage of Entries |
Work zone safety
hazards |
50% |
Hazards of working
in trenches or excavations |
40% |
PPE was missing
or used improperly |
30% |
Table I-9 shows the four
hazards most frequently documented in the SitRep
entries for Sewer and Water Service Restoration.
- Work zone safety (50%): Entries most often
noted lack of cones or signs.
- Trench/excavation hazards (40%) while accessing
the water or sewer lines. Trenching hazards associated
with water and sewer system restoration included
cave-in hazards (mentioned in nearly half of
these entries) and exit/egress issues (mentioned
in over one-quarter of these entries). Employers
need to ensure that trenches are properly protected
from cave-in and must have a competent person
inspect trenches before employees are allowed
to enter them and periodically thereafter.
- PPE concerns (30%): Over half of the entries
note inadequate face and head protection and
over a quarter noted a lack of hearing protection
when this protection was required. Inadequate
foot protection (e.g., lack of waterproof boots
when needed) was also discussed in several of
these entries.
- For additional precautions employers and employees
should refer to the Recommendations section
and to the Restoring Water and Sewer Services, Work Zone Safety and Traffic Controls within
a Work Area, and the Trenches and Excavations activity sheets.
Additional Hurricane Response and Recovery Fatality
Information
There were four employee fatalities between August 31, 2005 to March 21, 2006 associated with hurricane response
and recovery activities that are not described
above.
- Two employee fatalities that occurred during
the Removal of Floodwaters from Structures and
Initial Entry into Previously Flooded Areas.
These fatalities occurred on the same date and
at the same location when the employees were overcome
by hydrogen sulfide gas during removal of water
from a confined space.
- Two additional fatalities
occurred during Heavy Equipment and Powered
Industrial Truck Use. One person was struck
by a truck that flipped over on top of him
after he got out of the vehicle, which he had
parked on soft mulch. One person was crushed
when the jack he was using to lift the trailer
slipped, causing the truck’s
bumper to fall on his head. Four heavy equipment
fatalities are discussed in the debris reduction,
recycling, and disposal; debris collection and
removal; and the restoring electrical utilities
sections.
Exposure Controls for Activity-Specific Hazards
This section only addresses the hazards noted
above that are common among the eight activities
highlighted. The Matrix includes detailed, hazard-specific
recommendations for engineering controls, work
practices, and additional PPE in the individual
activity sheets.
- Work Zone Safety: Work zone safety precautions
and traffic control procedures are necessary
to protect response and recovery workers performing tasks adjacent
to or in roadways, and within a work site where
heavy equipment and vehicles are operating
near others. In both cases individuals are at
risk of being struck, either by on-coming traffic
or by vehicles and heavy equipment moving around
the site. After a hurricane, much of the recovery
work requires accessing structures, utilities,
or debris from roadways. Most recovery operations
require the use of heavy equipment. For this
reason, the Matrix includes an activity sheet
on Work Zone Safety and Traffic Controls within
a Work Area, which includes engineering
controls, work practices, and additional PPE
that employers must implement and require the
use of to protect employees. In general, employers
must:
- Ensure that employees understand the importance
of establishing traffic controls.
- Mark work zones with needed barriers, cones,
signs, and/or flaggers to provide plenty
of warning and appropriate direction to approaching
vehicles.
- Within work sites, establish a traffic control
pattern, mark work zones with cones, barricades,
and signs, and ensure that heavy equipment
operators stay alert and are aware of other
equipment and personnel near them and their
direction of travel.
- Fall Hazards and Fall Protection: Fall hazards
and exposure controls, including engineering
controls, work practices, and PPE, are highlighted
in the individual activity sheets in this Matrix.
Employers should review the individual activity
sheets for the operation their employees are
anticipated to perform and identify potential
fall hazards. In general, employers must:
- Address fall hazards through controls such
as guardrails, a safety monitoring system
including monitors and warning lines, and/or
fall protection equipment.
- If fall protection equipment is required,
train employees to understand where this equipment
is required and how to use it properly.
- Where employees will use aerial lifts,
provide them with fall protection equipment
that meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.453 and instruct them how to use the equipment
and anchor themselves to the bucket.
- PPE: Head, eye, hand, and foot protection
was required for most of the activities response and recovery workers
performed during hurricane response and recovery
operations. In many cases the PPE was not provided
or its use was not enforced. The Matrix identifies
the head, hand, eye, and foot protection recommended
for all activities in the disaster response
and recovery area in the General Recommendations section of the Matrix. The Matrix also identifies
additional PPE for specific hazards in the
individual activity sheets. In general, employers
must:
- Assess the need for PPE, and select the
PPE that will protect an employee performing
the job
- Ensure that PPE is available and sized for the
employee
- Train employees when and how to use required
PPE
- Enforce the use of PPE when it is required
- Ladders and Scaffolding: This equipment was
used frequently to access structures, roofs,
trees, etc., and to work from to complete inspection,
repair and other tasks at elevated locations.
The Matrix includes the improper use of ladders
and scaffolds as a hazard in many of the individual
activity sheets and highlights engineering
controls, work practices, and PPE in each.
In general, employers must:
- Ensure that ladders are properly secured,
protected, and always extend three feet above
landings
- Ensure that scaffolding
is secured, properly planked, and has guardrails
installed when needed. Scaffolding must also
be inspected by a competent person prior
to use.
|