OSHA Risk and Hazards - Assignment Example

OSHA Risk and Hazards Part 1 Falling, Impact, Acceleration, Lifting, and Vision Hazards 1) Walking and Slipping 2) Walkway Hazards 1) Hazards regarding slipping and falling or hazards related to walkways exist for each and every employee who is mobile within the area of work. As such, chemical spills, dirty floors, standing water and other issues can easily add to the dangers that would be represented in these cases. 2) Employees who are active within the work area and frequently move from one place to the other as a function of performing their job would be at the most risk; however, it is fair to say that all employees will experience some level of risk as a result of this hazard. 3) Part 29CFR Part 1910 standard 22 specifies several standards with respect to walking and slipping hazards in the workplace (Baron, 2011). Of these, 29CFR1910.22a(1) and 29CFR1910.22b(1) are the most applicable (Taylor, 2011). The reason for this is that these standards relate to the way in which designated walkways must be maintained and marked appropriately. 4) This can be accomplished by ensuring that standards are worked towards and that employees are provided with adequate training; concerning expectations of action for day to day operations. Random inspections can also help the firm to reduce the amount of risk that this particular set of hazards poses.  5) High severity level. The reason for this risk level being selected is predicated on the fact that mobility in the workplace is a function that nearly each and every employee values as a product of performing useful work. As such, any hazard to the quality of the walkways or hazards pertaining to slipping affect a large number of stakeholders. Hazards of Temperature Extremes 1) Heat Stress and Strain 2) Chemical Burns 1) Hazards regarding heat stress and strain and chemical burns relate only to specific employees within specific sectors of industrial production. As such, issues pertaining to damaged equipment, faulty inputs, lack of monitoring, failure to measure correctly, and other oversights are likely to contribute to issues relating to further hazards associated with these two previously denoted issues. 2) Those employees that find themselves working within industrial production areas or within construction arenas will be those which are most at risk. Yet, it should also be understood that there is an inherent risk for those employees/stakeholders, that work outside these zones as they could be negatively impacted by a breach of safety standards with respect to the aforementioned hazards. 3) Part 29CFR Part 1910 standard 132 specifies several standards with respect to the use of PPE (personal protective equipment) in dealing with high temperature or chemical substances. The reason for this is that these standards relate to the way in which designated issues must be handled and the requirement of the employer to provide access to readily maintained PPE as a function of expecting such activities as part of the job requirement (Zhu, 2011). 4) Abatement and control can be accomplished by creating standards within the employee responsibilities of day-to-day operations. Moreover, random and scheduled inspections can be taken as a means of ensuring that these standards are maintained so that they do not elevate to an actual OSHA violation.  5) Medium severity level. The reason for this risk level has been selected is based on the fact that not all workers will face a situation of chemical burns during their day to day operational hazards. Although this might encourage one to rank this as a low hazard, it should be understood that the severity of the threat is based on the potential for harm that it represents; thereby encouraging this analysis to rank it as a medium threat level. Pressure Hazards 1) High pressure water hazards 2) Cracking hazards – pressure vessels 1) Hazards regarding high pressure and cracking hazards relate to issues pertaining to damaged equipment, faulty inputs, lack of monitoring, failure to measure correctly, and other oversights are likely to contribute to issues relating to further hazards associated with these two previously denoted issues. 2) Employees who are actively involved in construction and/or industrial works are the ones that are most exposed to these hazards; however, it must also be noted that depending upon the size of the issue/hazard, those that work in unrelated sectors and are merely in close proximity might also experience hazards relating to the dangers that these exhibit. 3) Part 29CFR Part 1915 standard 172 and 173 specifies several standards with respect to how professionals should be expected to work within situations that involve high pressure or potential pressure vessel ruptures (Applebaum, 2012). The reason for this is that these standards relate to the way in which designated issues must be handled and the requirement of the employer to provide access and training with respect to a litany of measurement devices so that the employee can not only e protected but has current knowledge with respect to whatever threat might exist. 4) Whereas many of the other issues that have been discussed can be abated in a variety of different ways, one of the best and only ways to reduce hazard with respect to this specific threat is to perform regular as well as unscheduled inspections to ensure that compliance is being evidenced. Although this is not a certain way to ensure that an incident does not occur, it can go a long way in seeking to create a more reasonable approach to hazard reduction.   5) This set of hazards can be ranked as a medium severity level. The reason for this ranking has to do with the limitation of exposure that these hazards denote. For instance, situations involving chemical burns are not likely to be experienced by a large number of employees. However, rather than allowing this situation to be ranked as a low threat hazard, the danger that chemical burns and the other hazards associated with them create demand that it receive a higher threat level. Electrical Hazards 1) Electrical Hazards to humans 2) Arc Flash injuries 1) Hazards regarding high pressure and cracking hazards pertain to industrial processes more than any other factor. Therefore, the need to focus on these in order to improve these hazards must be effected. 2) Stakeholders involved in this particular hazard are of course those that work most closely within industrial production or construction areas. Because of this unique factor, the danger that is exhibited to other stakeholders is reduced; however, it is still extant. 3) Part 29CFR Part 1910 standard 303 and others specify several standards with respect to how professionals should be expected to work within situations that involve the danger of exposure to electrical hazards; up to and including arc flash injury. Standard 303 as well as most others are focused mostly on maintaining strict standards of installation and inspection to ensure that no faulty issues might cause hazards later on (Drugsby, 2010). 4) A thorough inspection of the job site will go a long way in ascertaining whether or not standards are being met. Moreover, if the inspection(s) reveal that standards are not being met and that certain key shortcomings are noted, it is recommended that additional inspections should be scheduled to ensure that changes are implemented.  5) This can be ranked at a medium severity level. The reason for this risk level being selected is once again based on the fact that not all workers will be exposed to these specific hazards. Yet, it cannot be ranked as a low hazard due to the fact that the potential for harm is high; even in the few cases that might be represented. Noise and Vibration Hazards 1) Hearing loss 2) Vibration hazards Part 29CFR Part 1910 standard 95 and others specify several standards with respect to how professionals should be expected to work within situations that involve the danger of noise exposure and/or vibrations. These standards that are included within this section of OSHA regulation invariably are concentric upon hearing protection and seeking to remove the individual, or protect them, from high levels of extended noise exposure/vibration. 1) Hazards regarding noise and vibration relate only to specific employees within specific sectors of industrial production. As such, issues pertaining to length of exposure, failure to certify decibel levels, failure to provide protective equipment and/or issues concerning negative health impacts that are the result of long term exposure as well as other oversights are likely to contribute to issues relating to further hazards associated with these two previously denoted issues. 2) This hazard is specific to the stakeholders/employees that are actively involved in industrial work. Yet, as with several of the other hazards that have previously been discussed, it must also be noted that depending upon the size of the issue/hazard, those that work in unrelated sectors and are close to these hazards might experience a possible danger as well. 3) Part 29CFR Part 1910 standard 95 and others specify several standards with respect to how professionals should be expected to work within situations that involve the danger of noise exposure and/or vibrations. These standards that are included within this section of OSHA regulation invariably are concentric upon hearing protection and seeking to remove the individual, or protect them, from high levels of extended noise exposure/vibration. 4) As with the other means of abatement that have been defined, regular inspection of noise levels/vibration levels can and should be conducted to ensure that safety standards are being met.   5) This hazard can be ranked as a medium severity level. Although many individuals could be exposed to higher levels of noise or vibration in the workplace, it is not something that can cause serious long-term damage; providing that the employer engages with training the employees in the use and applications of PPE and other remediation techniques. PART 2: In terms of seeking to classify a hazards risk level, it is necessary to understand that this is based upon frequency times of severity. Within such an understanding, the above situations will be defined based upon an increasing to decreasing level of overall risk of based upon the understanding the risk is defined in terms of frequency multiplied by severity. Firstly, the issue of dangers with walkways and slippage relating to OSHA standards that were discussed, represents an extraordinarily high risk. The underlying reason for this has to do with the fact that the equation of risk level (frequency multiplied by severity) is maximized due to the fact that the danger posed within this together situation has a very high value with respect to frequency. Due to the fact that employees from all different sectors of a particular firm or business institution will find it necessary to move about the workplace, such dangers represent an extraordinarily high risk level. Moving down the risk level analysis, the secondary issue that will be represented is with regard to electrical hazards and/4 arc flash injuries. Once again, the frequency and severity coefficients are relatively high with respect to the way in which this can impact upon a large number of stakeholders and likely cause a very high risk level. Continuing down the chain of overall risk level, high pressure hazards and tracking hazards were ranked within a medium risk level due to the fact that these are only exhibited within a certain number of industries. The very same can be said with respect to hearing loss and noise vibrations as well as the stress/strain and chemical burns. Although the overall severity of these is, when and if they are exhibited, can be profound, the frequency at which they are exhibited and a limited number of organizations that face this risk create a situation in which this particular author has ranked relatively low with respect to the overall risk level. PART 3: Predicated upon these findings, it is necessary to understand that resources must be allocated seeking to address these shortcomings and dangers within workplace in an effective manner that is predicated upon their overall level of risk. Although it is true that the eventual goal will be to reduce and ameliorate the risk levels that are associated with each of these potential hardships/hazards, the most realistic and intelligent approach is to seek to address those issues that pose the greatest threat first. Because of this, issues pertaining to walkways and slippage as well as electrical issues and are firms must be addressed and have resources allocated to them in a primary manner (Traynor, 2012). Only at such a time in which these issues have been addressed and correct standards have been in place, as well as activities to monitor and engage whether or not employees are abiding by requirements that help to reduce these dangers can be possible for an overall improvement to be noted. However, within such an understanding, it must also be reiterated that the medium to low level risks must not be forgotten. Far too many companies and firms do a target analysis and consider the fact that they must ameliorate the most pressing and major risks by devoting all available resources to them. However, such an approach necessarily leaves lingering doubt with respect to the degree and extent to which secondary and tertiary risk levels are address and ameliorated. References Applebaum, R. (2012).OSHA revises Standard. (2012). Chemical Engineering, 119(5), 19. Baron, L. (2011). OSHA's Safety Standard. (2014). Professional Safety, 59(6), 24. Coniglio, J. (2010). OSHA Inspections: What to Do When OSHA Calls. Professional Safety, 55(12), 39-41. Drugsby, D. (2010). OSHA Publishes Updated Electrical Installation Standard. Professional Safety, 52(4), 16-17. Taylor, B. (2011). Complying With OSHA's Standard. Professional Safety, 56(7), 42-46. Traynor, K. (2012). OSHA revises hazard standard. American Journal Of Health-System Pharmacy, 69(10), 818-820. doi:10.2146/news120034 Zhu, W. (2011). OSHA's SIP. Professional Safety, 52(5), 52-55. Read More