Audit, Compliance and Risk Blog

Within the U.S., most chemical safety requirements are imposed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For example, OSHA (or delegated state agencies) administers a Process Safety Management (PSM) Standard, while EPA (or delegated state agencies) administers the Accidental Release Prevention (ARP) regulation. In addition to these sets of regulators, however, Congress has created a national agency to conduct independent investigations of major chemical accidents, and to issue accident-specific findings and specific or general recommendations for improved chemical handling and regulation. This agency’s formal name is the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board—which usually refers to itself as the Chemical Safety Board or CSB.

Federal and state laws govern “hazardous wastes”—the federal law is commonly called RCRA, after the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. However, RCRA itself was enacted as an expansion of the prior Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, and requirements for both solid and hazardous wastes have been revised many times in recent decades. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers these requirements nationally, delegating many provisions to individual states that qualify for authorization to assume regulatory roles.

Federal and state laws govern “hazardous wastes”—the federal law is commonly called RCRA, after the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. However, RCRA itself was enacted as an expansion of the prior Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) of 1965, and requirements for both solid and hazardous wastes have been revised many times in recent decades. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers these requirements nationally, delegating many provisions to individual states that qualify for authorization to assume regulatory roles.

On November 12, U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a bilateral agreement to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Since these countries are the two biggest economies and largest emitters of GHGs – and are in a period when they seem to disagree about almost everything – this agreement has substantial symbolic value. But will it have much practical value?

Strategic planners around the world are preparing “climate change adaptation plans,” designed to identify their organization’s key activities and missions, evaluate how climate change might affect them, and develop organizational changes designed to anticipate and adapt in ways that preserve the organization’s performance. On October 31, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its own Climate Change Adaptation Plan. EPA’s divisions (Water, Air and Radiation, etc.) and 10 regional offices also issued plans covering their activities. These Plans provides a collective model for multi-level organizational plans, and also tell organizations in the US what help to expect from EPA when they plan for their own adaptations to climate change.

STP Launches New Online Gap Analysis Tool

Auditors and Quality Managers across all manufacturing and service industries use ISO and OHSAS standards to put their Environmental and Health and Safety Management Systems into practice. These standards help implement effective and efficient EHS requirements, or VPP Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems. In this blog I review and summarize the two standards, their aims and obligations.

In September I blogged about OSHA’s Airborne Contaminant Standard, which sets ambient air limits for over 400 workplace air contaminants to protect employees from exposures to airborne chemical and particulate contaminants in workplace air. In October, OSHA issued an extensive Request for Information (RFI), asking for comments on a variety of approaches to setting these limits in the future. In the RFI, OSHA notes that most exposure limits date from 1971, and so they don’t reflect four decades of advances in understanding of chemical toxicology. OSHA is attempting to build on legal requirements for standard-setting developed by court cases since 1971, and to update—the agency doesn’t say finesse—some of the limitations. The RFI asks over 50 questions, and solicits comments no later than April 8, 2015.

Although most “workplace violence” incidents are low-level psychological or physical altercations between co-workers, Canadians have just been tragically reminded of the dangers of murders by interlopers. Government buildings are the likeliest targets for terrorism, and financial and retail buildings the likeliest targets for non-political criminals, but all workplaces face at least some of these most severe risks. There’s no way to eliminate these risks, but commonsense workplace security measures can reduce them. This note discusses approaches to evaluating and reinforcing security against external threats – which are important subsets of broader workplace violence prevention efforts.

Every employer probably should know that employees have a right to receive at least the “minimum wage” for the hours they work. But employers may or may not focus on the fact that there’s not just one “minimum wage” – there are many, depending on the jurisdiction, the employer’s business or governmental sector, and the employee’s status. The federally-mandated minimum wage for most employees is $7.25 per hour (set in 2007 under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)), but some categories of workers can be paid lower wages, and some states require higher wages. Employers with scattered and diverse activities and work forces need to track developments under each applicable situation.