Standard Interpretations - (Archived) Table of Contents|
April 8, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR: ALL REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH: LEO CAREY, DIRECTOR OFFICE OF FIELD PROGRAMS FROM: PATRICIA K. CLARK, DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS SUBJECT: Clarification of OSHA Instruction CPL 2.45B CH-1, The Revised Field Operations Manual (FOM)We have discovered that all references to "records only" inspections had not been removed by Change 1 of the FOM, as desired. This oversight has caused some confusion. Therefore, to clarify the agency's intent, the calculation of the lost workday injury (LWDI) rate for programmed safety inspections is no longer to be used for limiting the scope of a programmed safety inspection. All such programmed inspections scheduled from the safety inspection register shall be comprehensive inspections. These references identified below will be removed in the next change of the FOM in addition to the pen and ink changes you are requested to make at this time.
The LWDI rate shall be calculated as part of the records review (FOM Chapter III,D.4.) for comparison with the overall industry rate. The rate may be one of several factors to be considered, in making a determination to expand the scope of an inspection which would otherwise be limited in nature.
A question has also been raised as to the interplay between the provisions of B.5.b.c. and B.5.b.d. of Chapter II. Subsection c. calls for a comprehensive inspection when a complaint inspection will be conducted at an establishment on the Area Office safety or health register, in accordance with Chapter IX, A.9.a. Subsection d. indicates that normally only limited scope warrants will be sought when,a warrant to perform a complaint inspection is necessary. By way of clarification, subsection d. is referring to complaint inspections other than those covered in subsection c. In other words, when Chapter IX, A.9.a. calls for a comprehensive inspection to be done, a warrant for an inspection of that scope should be sought.
Please make "pen and ink" corrections on CH-1 for the following paragraphs that were not changed as intended that led to the confusion:
Chapter II, page II-1, change "B.4. Unprogrammed" to "B.4. Programmed"; after "B.4. number Scope "B.5.";
Chapter II, page II-2, change "B.5.b.a." to "B.5.b.(1)";
change "B.5.b.b." to "B.5.b.(2)";
change "B.5.b.c." to "B.5.b.(3)";
change "B.5.b.d." to "B.5.b.(4)";
change "B.5.b.d.(1)" to "B.5.b.(4)(a)"
change "B.5.b.d.(2)" to "B.5.b.(4)(b)"
Chapter II, page II-24, Delete paragraph E.2.b.(1)(g);
Chapter III, page III-22, Delete paragraphs D.3.a.(5); D.3.a.(5)(a);
Chapter III, page III-35, Delete paragraphs D.4.b.; D.4.b.(1);
D.4.b.(1)(a); D.4.b.(1)(b); D.4.b.(2);
Chapter III, page III-35, Add new paragraph as follows:
D.4.b. Results of Establishments LWDI RATE. The LWDI rate calculated for the establishment shall be compared to the most recent national rate for manufacturing published by BLS.
(1) The CSHO shall give the results to both the employer and tee employee' representative.
(2) The CSHO shall discuss the rate along with the results of other documents reviewed during records review, to determine if there are specific work areas that need to be included in the inspection.
(3) The CSHO shall explain to the employer that the rate by itself win not affect the scope of the inspection.
Chapter III, page III-36, Delete paragraphs D.4.b.(2)(a);
Chapter III, page III-37, Delete paragraphs D.4.b.(2)(b)2;
D.4.(2)(b)3; NOTE; D.4.b.(3);
D.4.b.(4); D.4.b.(5); NOTE;
Chapter IX, page IX-11, A.9.a, change "safety inspection cycle" to "safety inspection register"; and
A.9.c, change "health inspection cycle" to "health inspection register".
Please direct any questions or comments on this matter to Barbara H. Burr at
|Standard Interpretations - (Archived) Table of Contents|