|<< Back to MACOSH - Meeting Minutes
The Maritime Advisory Committee for Occupational Safety and Health convened its
fifth meeting under the current charter at 8:30 A.M. on April 29, 2010, at the
Newport Marriott Hotel, 25 America's Cup Avenue, Newport, RI 02840. The meeting
adjourned at 2:50 P.M.
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public
Law 92-463, the full Committee meeting and the workgroup meetings held on April
27 and 29, 2010, were open to the public.
Committee members present:
James Thornton, Chairman - Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Newport News
OSHA Committee Staff in attendance:
Stewart Adams - U.S. Department of the Navy
Alan Davis - American Seafoods Company
Alton H. Glass, Sr. - United Steelworkers
Lesley E. Johnson – International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Kenneth Killough – South Carolina Stevedores Association
Charles Lemon – Washington State Department of Labor and Industries
Jennifer Lincoln – NIOSH
George Lynch – International Longshoremen's Association
Marc MacDonald – Pacific Maritime Association
Tim Podue – International Longshore and Warehouse Union
Donald V. Raffo – General Dynamics
Barry Richardson – The Columbia Group
Kenneth A. Smith – U.S. Coast Guard
Joseph V. Daddura, Designated Federal Official
Staff of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in attendance:
Susan Brinkerhoff, Counsel
Veneta Chatmon, OSHA Exhibits Manager
Christie Garner, Administrative Assistant
Amy Wangdahl, Shipyard Workgroup Representative
Vanessa Welch, Longshore Workgroup Representative
Steve Butler, Director, Office of Maritime Compliance
Members of the Public in attendance:
Paul Comolli, Office of Maritime, Directorate of Enforcement Programs
David Doucet, Compliance Officer, Region VI
Leo Edwards, Area Director, Region III
Deborah Gabry, Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management
Jim Maddux, Deputy Director, Office of Maritime Standards
Katie Nishimura, Compliance Officer, Region I
Phil Peist, Compliance Officer, Region II
John Vos, Compliance Officer, Region IV
Jack Reich, Compliance Officer, Region IX
Randy White, Area Director, Region X
Tracy Burchett, International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Coast Safety
Chairman Thornton announced reminders, first, that the next MACOSH meeting will
be held July 13-15, 2010, in Long Beach, CA, and second, that the deadline for
nominating future committee members is May 7, 2010. Roll call was taken and the
public introduced themselves. A summary of the meeting agenda was given by the
Chairman, followed by the committee discussion of the minutes from the previous
meeting held in Washington, D.C., on January 20, 2010. The Committee unanimously
approved the minutes as corrected (Pete Favazza's name was misspelled on page
10), and they were entered into the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as
Adrian Diaz, International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Virginia
Jeff Facenda, Metro Machine, Virginia
Pete Favazza, International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Coast Safety
Kelly Garber, Eagle Marine Services, Seattle, WA
Chet Matthews, Brunswick Marine Trade Association
Bill Mutter, Navy Crane Center
Kevin Nugent, Bayonne Drydock
Polly Parks, Southern Recycling
Jeff Smith, International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Coast Safety
Susan Swanton, Maine Marine Trades Association
Cameron Williams, International Longshore and Warehouse Union
Jim Maddux, Acting Deputy Director
Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Mr. Maddux welcomed the Committee and public. Mr. Maddux explained that the
Assistant Secretary, David Michaels, and Directorate of Standards and Guidance
Director, Dorothy Dougherty, had hoped to attend the meeting but were prevented
from doing so by other commitments; however, they hope to make the next MACOSH
meeting. Mr. Maddux acknowledged the tremendous amount of work that the
Committee has accomplished for the Agency and thanked them for their
involvement. Mr. Maddux provided the group with an agency update, discussing the
implementation of policies of the new administration, one being the emphasis on
standards and enforcement. He expressed that recent disasters, including the
Tesoro explosion in Washington State, the mine collapse in West Virginia, and
the oil rig explosion in the Gulf, highlight the importance of occupational
safety and health work. In addition, Mr. Maddux talked about the Agency's
aggressive regulatory agenda, which has shown an increase in funding and
personnel resources. The Agency is working hard to remove certain tasks from the
regulatory agenda and is placing emphasis on meeting projected deadlines on
remaining tasks. This revisiting of the regulatory agenda entails the completion
of standing items, the removal of projects that are not getting immediate
attention, and the addition of regulations dealing with high-impact areas.
Current OSHA efforts include:
Questions and Answers:
- Hexavalent chromium. In February of 2010, OSHA published a direct final rule
for hexavalent chromium that dealt with employee notification of monitoring
results. This was in response to a court remand. No significant or adverse
comments were received. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Agency will
announce an effective date for the standard in the coming months.
- Beryllium. The Agency has initiated a peer review on risk assessment and
health effects associated with beryllium exposure and is in the process of
selecting academics and scientists that will be involved in reviewing these
highly technical sections of the standard. OSHA anticipates completion of this
phase in November of 2010, at which point the Agency will publish a notice of
- Silica. The Agency completed the peer review of the health effects and risk
assessment sections of this proposed standard in December of 2009. OSHA is
currently in the process of revising the two sections with an anticipated
publication date of February 2011.
- Construction Cranes and Derricks. OSHA considers this rulemaking to be very
important. With several crane collapses in the last few years in highly
urbanized areas, significant media and congressional attention has focused on
the risks involved with cranes and derricks used in the construction industry.
The Agency published a proposed rule, received comments, and held public
hearings on the subject. The final rule is undergoing review by OMB.
- Hazard Communication. OSHA published a proposed rule to update the existing
hazard communication rule to be consistent with the globally harmonized system
of hazard communication. Some of the changes involve adopting standardized
pictograms and standardized hazard warning messages on material safety data
sheets and labels.
- Walking and Working Surfaces. OSHA is in the process of publishing a proposed
rule dealing with fall protection issues, including the use of fall protection
in the absence of guardrails, stairs, ladders, and so forth. OMB recently
completed its review of the proposed rule, and the Agency plans for its
publication during May of 2010.
- Combustible dust. Last fall OSHA published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPR) on combustible dust hazards. Although the record is
technically closed, OSHA continues to solicit useful information and data that
will assist the Agency to fully understand the effects of a combustible dust
standard in the maritime industry. The agency held stakeholder meetings across
the country from which a great amount of information was gathered. The Agency is
in the process of conducting site visits and research to determine the needed
direction with this difficult issue. OSHA intends to initiate a small-business
panel, where the public and the panel will be briefed on the Agency's thinking
on what a regulation would look like and its economic impact. At that point, the
panel will provide feedback to OSHA.
- Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSD) Column. This proposed standard, which would
implement a new 300 log with an MSD column, was published in January of 2010.
The comment period closed in March and a public hearing followed. OSHA is
working towards publishing the final rule in July of 2010.
- Modernization of OSHA Recordkeeping and Reporting. This initiative takes
advantage of new Internet and electronic reporting systems to upgrade our injury
and illness reporting systems. Currently, employers keep records until the end
of the year. Then these records are provided to OSHA or BLS, which compile the
data, leaving a huge lapse of time between occurrence of an incident and its
report. The Agency is inquiring as to the feasibility of a system where
incidents can be reported as they occur (e.g., within a couple of days or week).
The Agency intends to hold stakeholder meetings in July of 2010 to work through
Q: Regarding the modernization of OSHA recordkeeping and reporting, Mr.
MacDonald cautioned Mr. Maddux that the system developed will need to have the
ability to track each incident from start to finish. Additionally, he expressed
the concern that a great deal of money has been used towards tracking systems
that are already in place and that it will be a waste of money to completely
A: Mr. Maddux thanked Mr. MacDonald for expressing his concern and discussed
that it is not the Agency's intent for systems that are already in place to be
scrapped, but stated that this is an item to be looked at during the stakeholder
meeting held in July.
Q: Dr. Lincoln inquired how the Agency intended to regulate injury and illness
A: Mr. Maddux explained that a number of state plans have regulations for injury
and illness prevention programs now, which are either mandatory or
incentive-based programs. Approximately 20 of these programs exist through
either their OSHA state plan or worker's compensation divisions.
He further explained that OSHA standards are only narrow slices of safety and
health (e.g., requirements for guardrails on stairs or material safety data
sheets for chemicals). They do not provide an overall framework of how to comply
with those regulations set by OSHA from a process standpoint.
Therefore, the Agency feels that the appropriate thing to do is to set up a
standardized process where employers look at their own hazards, culture, and
environment and work with their employees to develop and institute solutions for
hazards/problems without having a narrow OSHA standard for every hazard that
Q: Mr. Adams requested that Mr. Maddux briefly describe the process of the
stakeholder meetings he mentioned and how employers get involved.
A: Mr. Maddux stated that stakeholder meetings are for everyone, not just
employers. The Agency's goal is to involve a broad range of people with
different interests. He further explained the process, beginning with the
publication of a Federal Register notice that announces to the public that OSHA
plans to have one or more stakeholder meetings. In this notice, the date and
location are provided, as well as information on how one can become involved. In
recent planning for these meetings, the Agency has been setting up an Internet
site where people can submit their requests to attend.
During the meetings, there are generally two types of participants -- (1) "
table participants," who are actually engaged in the discussion, and (2)
"observers," who are bystanders to the discussion. However, the meetings are
very informal, allowing the "observers" to interject at any point. The ideas or
information obtained from the stakeholder meetings will be used in policy
decisions in terms of what direction to go.
Q: Mr. Davis encouraged OSHA to hold meetings and hearings a little further west
of the Mississippi River. He noted the challenges in today's economy for a
business or an association to come up with the money to send somebody to
represent them in, say, Washington or Chicago. People who are in the trenches
are not going to be able to take the time out to travel extended distances.
A: Mr. Maddux acknowledged the comment.
Q: Mr. Favazza asked, in response to the discussion of the modernization of
records, whether the organizations that supply the workforce will be able to
access the information that is accumulated in this process.
A: Mr. Maddux responded that OSHA is working on the technological issues
associated with collecting and disseminating the data and would probably like to
get some input from worker representatives on these issues. He then described
the kinds of questions the Agency is trying to have answered:
Q: Ms. Parks commented that the U.S. regulatory standards for ship recycling are
much more stringent than the ISO approach.
- How can the collected data be used to further occupational safety and health?
- Is there a way to provide access to a variety of users (e.g., unions,
academic community, etc.)?
- How do we protect the privacy of the injured worker?
- Do we provide a system where workers can report their own injuries?
A: Mr. Maddux responded to Ms. Park's concern by asking if any of the
shipbreaking facilities she mentioned were certified under the ISO, to which she
responded "yes" and went on to explain that MARAD worked a lot on the issue and
felt that it was not the right approach to take. Mr. Maddux thanked Ms. Parks
for expressing her concern and stated that he would look into the issue.
Q: Mr. Mathews asked whether the injury and illness prevention program will be
mandated for all employers, regardless of size.
A: Mr. Maddux responded that that is one of the tough issues, and that you don't
expect the same level, especially of paperwork and of sophistication, from small
employers. He used California as an example of a model program approach. This
approach allows small employers to be exempt from having to provide a written
program. Also, other small employers in certain industries, such as agriculture
and construction, are required to use the model program provided. This saves the
employer the task of developing their own paperwork for the program. The agency
intends to develop a program that small businesses can modify in a way that
makes sense for them, while still protecting workers.
Q: Mr. Thornton asked, with regards to the cranes and derricks final
construction standard, if there will be a construction directive that comes out
fairly soon, so that the maritime industry will be able to use it for additional
A: Mr. Maddux responded that he was unaware of the timeframe in which a
directive will be issued, since it is coming out of a different directorate.
The introductory remarks of Mr. Maddux were entered into the record under Docket
OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 16. And his PowerPoint presentation was entered into
the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 17.
Mr. MacDonald reported on the workgroup's top priorities, determined at the
January 20, 2010, meeting, and their status.
The Committee voted in favor of accepting the workgroup report. The PowerPoint
presentation entitled "Longshore Workgroup Report of April 29, 2010" was entered
into the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 20.
- Working on the Apron or Highline Quick Card – This guidance highlights the
dangers of working in the apron or highline in marine terminals, which is
defined as the area underneath the cranes. During the January 20, 2010 meeting,
this document was completed and provided to the Shipyard workgroup for review.
The Shipyard workgroup provided suggested edits, which were incorporated into
the document. The Committee unanimously voted in favor of accepting the document
and recommending that OSHA publish it. The document entitled "Working on the
Apron or Highline Traffic Lanes and Safety Zones in Marine Cargo Handling" was
entered into the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 18.
- Speed in Terminals – During the previous meeting held on January 20, 2010, the
Longshore workgroup had a lengthy discussion about a white paper that was
submitted to the workgroup dealing with controlling speed in marine terminals.
Differences of opinion existed on this topic, and there was debate on how to
proceed with the paper. As a result, the Committee recommended that the
workgroup revisit the topic further.
The workgroup conducted some research and noted that some language could be
incorporated into the existing Traffic Safety in Marine Terminals document,
which was published in 2007 and exists on the OSHA webpage. Therefore, the
workgroup modified the existing OSHA guidance by adding a section entitled,
"Controlling Speed." They felt that this action was a good way to address the
concerns in the white paper.
The Shipyard workgroup was given the opportunity to review the document.
Comments from the Shipyard workgroup were incorporated into the document. The
Committee unanimously voted in favor of accepting the document and recommending
that OSHA re-publish the updated document. The document entitled "Traffic Safety
in Marine Terminals Guidance Document" was entered into the record under Docket
OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 19.
- Stuck Cones – Semi automatic twist locks (also known as "cones") are used to
secure stacked intermodal containers to each other while aboard a ship; they
have some moving parts that can become stuck. The issue is how to get someone on
top of a container safely to access the stuck cone, and then how to make sure
that that person is not in the bight when the container is released. The
workgroup conducted additional research and collected pictures in order to
develop a guidance document, which they hope to have completed before the end of
the current charter.
- Container Rail Safety Guidance – The workgroup is working on a complex
container rail safety guidance document. Much work needs to be done to the
document, and the workgroup is hoping to have it complete before the full
Committee for a vote by the next MACOSH meeting.
Dr. Jennifer Lincoln, NIOSH
During the first meeting of the current charter, a question was raised involving
what the committee should be focusing their attention on. Through discussion, it
was determined that a good starting point would be to look at the injury and
fatality data from the maritime industry. In response to this determination,
OSHA worked closely with the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) to obtain injury
and fatality data from the maritime industry to find out which areas needed more
guidance/regulation. The data were quite cumbersome, and Committee members had a
lot of questions they wanted cleared up, so they requested that a speaker from
BLS address the group.
At the January 20, 2010, meeting, Janice Windau from BLS gave a presentation to
the Committee, OSHA staff, and the public to try and explain the data obtained
from the maritime industry. Although this presentation was helpful in explaining
the data, there were still a lot of questions. Therefore, MACOSH member Dr.
Lincoln was asked to compile the BLS presentation and data into a white paper
that explains how to use injury and fatality data for action.
A white paper entitled "Using Fatality Data for Action" was drafted by Dr.
Lincoln. During her presentation, she referred to this document. She provide the
group with a summary of the paper's contents, explaining that the "paper is
trying to outline a process of how this committee could use the information to
understand what other things we should be working on."
The first section covered surveillance. Surveillance is the ongoing and
systematic collection, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of
information. Surveillance is used to describe the size and characteristics of a
particular problem and to identify the populations at risk, the risk factors,
the modifiable intervention points, and the trends over a period of time.
Surveillance information is used to design interventions, and since surveillance
is continuing, it can be used to evaluate the impact of those interventions.
Next, Dr. Lincoln went over the previously submitted BLS data and tables by
defining some of the acronyms used and simplifying the form used to display the
data. The data, collected from 2003 to 2008, revealed that a large number of
fatalities in the shipyard industry occurred from falls, including falls from
ships; struck by falling objects; and caught in or between. For the same
timeframe in marine cargo–handling, the predominant fatalities were attributed
to workers being struck by vehicles and falling objects.
Dr. Lincoln gave examples, using data from the fishing industry, to explain how
important this type of data is in determining which safety and health areas
employers, OSHA, and individuals should concentrate on. She stressed that MACOSH,
in conjunction with the agency, should start to learn more about why these
fatalities and hazards occur that are associated in particular with falls,
contact with objects and equipment, and being struck by vehicles. Also, Dr.
Lincoln suggested that, given the opportunity, the Committee should welcome
additional face-to-face meetings to learn about successful programs and more
information about the hazards.
The PowerPoint presentation entitled "Using Fatality Data for Action" and
presented by Dr. Lincoln was entered into the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001
as Exhibit 21. Her white paper with the same title was entered into the record
under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 25.
Donald V. Raffo
Mr. Raffo discussed the following top priorities of the Shipyard Workgroup,
which were determined at the January 20, 2010, meeting, and their status.
The Committee voted in favor of accepting the workgroup report. The PowerPoint
presentation entitled, "Shipyard Workgroup April 29, 2010" was entered into
Docket OSHA 2010-001 as Exhibit 26.
- Commercial Fishing and Confined Spaces – The workgroup drafted a fact sheet,
providing guidance on confined space safety on fishing vessels. The Longshore
workgroup reviewed the document and provided recommendations, which were
incorporated. The Longshore workgroup comments were presented in a document
entitled "Longshore Workgroup Comments on Shipyard Workgroup Document, Confined
Space Safety on Commercial Fishing Vessels." This document was entered into the
record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 22. The Committee unanimously
voted in favor of accepting the fact sheet and recommending that OSHA publish
it. The document entitled "Confined Space Safety on Commercial Fishing Vessels"
was entered into the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 23.
A second fact sheet is in development on fall protection. This fact sheet is
directed at the commercial fisheries operations, and vessel captains or masters
as the target audience. It is the goal of the Shipyard workgroup to have it
complete and present it before the full Committee for a vote by the next MACOSH
- Arc-flash Safety – Many larger ships are starting to switch over to electric
systems. This change increases the risk of fatalities due to arc flashes. The
workgroup drafted an arc-flash safety document to be incorporate into the
upcoming SHIPS document on electrical safety. The document includes specific
hazards and abatement recommendations. The workgroup's goal at the previous
meeting was to present it to the full Committee for a vote; however, it was
determined that the document needed further refining. The Shipyard workgroup
will present a revised document, in final form, to the full Committee for a vote
at the next MACOSH meeting. The draft document entitled "Arc Flash Hazards" was
entered into the record under Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 24.
- Scaffolding and Cranes – The workgroup has been conducting a review of 29 CFR
1915.71 (the shipyard employment standard for scaffolds or staging) and 29 CFR
1926.550(g) (the construction standard for crane or derrick suspended personnel
platforms). It is the Committee's hope that the information obtained will help
OSHA to develop a standard that is unique to the industry. The Shipyard
workgroup developed a white paper with specific recommendations, which they are
ready to submit to the Longshore workgroup for review and comment. It is the
goal of the Shipyard workgroup to have it complete and present it to the full
Committee for a vote by the next MACOSH meeting.
- BLS Data – The workgroup wanted to ensure they were looking in the proper work
areas to see where the injuries and fatalities were in the maritime industry. At
the previous meeting, held on January 20, 2010, the workgroup tasked Dr. Lincoln
with developing a one page white paper on BLS statistics on injuries in shipyard
employment and advising how the information could be useful to the Committee.
Dr. Lincoln completed the white paper, "Using Fatality Data for Action" (Exhibit
25 in docket OSHA-2010-0001), and presented her findings to the full Committee
with the aid of a Power Point presentation (Exhibit 21). The Committee
unanimously voted in favor of accepting the white paper.
- Fact Sheets – During the previous meeting, OSHA presented the Shipyard
Workgroup with two fact sheets: one on ventilation during hot work, and one on
eye protection against radiant energy while welding. The workgroup provided some
initial recommendations to OSHA. The Agency incorporated the comments and
resubmitted the fact sheets for review and comment. The Shipyard workgroup
conducted a secondary review and provided additional recommendations. The two
fact sheets are currently with the Longshore workgroup, which should be able to
provide comments by the next meeting. These two fact sheets were entered into
Docket OSHA-2010-0001 as Exhibit 27 (Draft Fact Sheet, "Maritime Industry -- Eye
Protection against Radiant Energy for Welding and Allied Operations in Shipyard
Employment, 29 CFR 1915") and Exhibit 28 (Draft Fact Sheet, "Maritime Industry
-- Ventilation for Welding and Allied Operations in Shipyard Employment, 29 CFR
- Shipbreaking Safety Guidance – During the early part of 2010, OSHA published a
guidance document entitled "Safe Work Practices for Shipbreaking," which
provides recommended safe practices as well as regulatory requirements for the
shipbreaking industry. Following publication, several of the sections were
challenged by a member of the public, Polly Parks of Southern Recycling.
This document was reviewed by MACOSH during the previous charter. The Agency has
requested the Committee's involvement in working through the areas under
scrutiny. The Shipyard workgroup requested that Ms. Parks provide them with more
detailed information on the specific sections of the guidance document that she
is concerned with, as well as some recommendations. With the provided
information, the Committee will then begin to work through some of the issues
and will contact representatives from the industry to determine what steps, if
any, towards revision are necessary.
Chairman Thornton thanked the Committee members and the public for their
attendance and reminded everyone of the upcoming meeting, which will take place
July 13 – 15, 2010 in Long Beach, CA.
At 2:50 p.m. – Meeting adjourned
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing minutes are
accurate and complete.
James Thornton, Chairman
Maritime Advisory Committee for Occupational Safety and Health
These minutes will be formally considered by the Committee at its next meeting,
and any corrections or notations will be incorporated in the minutes of that