Maritime Advisory Committee for Occupational Safety and Health

 Meeting

September 21, 2011

Portland, Maine

MACOSH members in attendance:

James Thornton, Chair – American Industrial Hygiene Association

Karen Conrad – North Pacific Fishing Vessel Owners Association

Philip Dovinh – Marine Chemist Association

Michael Flynn – International Association of Mechanics & Aerospace
Workers

Kelly Garber – API Limited

Robert Godinez – International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 

Lesley Johnson – International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Charles Lemon – Washington State Department of Labor and Industries

Christopher McMahon – U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime
Administration

Tim Podue – International Longshore & Warehouse Union

Donald Raffo – General Dynamics

Arthur Ross – Texas Terminals L.P.

MACOSH members absent:

George Lynch – International Longshoremen’s Association

Ken Smith – U.S. Coast Guard

DOL Support Staff in Attendance:

Susan Brinkerhoff, Counsel for MACOSH

Veneta Chatmon

Theresa Clark

Joe Daddura, MACOSH Designated Federal Official

Dorothy Dougherty

Christie Garner

Bill Perry

Danielle Watson

Vanessa Welch

Public in Attendance:

Gene Alvarez – Rogers Shipbuilding, Bath

Steve Butler – OSHA National Office

Bill Coffin – OSHA Augusta Area Office

Angelo Costa – OSHA Region 3

Jason Curtis – Maine Marine Trade Association

Greg Grondin – Marine Chemist at Bath iron Works

John Halpin – National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

LeAnn Jillings – OSHA Directorate of Cooperate and State Programs

Bart Limbell – Chair of the Safety Committee, Bath Iron Works

Laura Masterson – Bath Iron Works

Chet Matthews – Independent Consultant

Bill Mueller – Navy Crane Center

Katie Nishimura – OSHA Region 1

Polly Parks – Southern Recycling

Jack Reich – OSHA Region 9

Jerry Swanson – PMA

Susan Swanton – Maine Marine Trades Association, Portland, Maine

Kevin Sullivan – OSHA Region 2 

John Vos – OSHA Region 4

Paul Weiser – ILWU

Randy White – OSHA Region 10

Welcome and Introduction

Dorothy Dougherty, Director

Directorate of Standards and Guidance

Ms. Dougherty welcomed the Committee and informed them that her staff
has reported to her on the success of the workgroups during the meetings
the previous day and during the conference calls between the MACOSH
meetings.  Ms. Dougherty also told the Committee that she is looking
forward to listening to their recommendations and viewing the work
products developed from all of their hard work.  Ms. Dougherty informed
the Committee that OSHA is moving on the previous Committee’s guidance
products.  Five of the longshoring guidance products (Intermodal
Container Repair document, Single-piece and Multi-piece Rim Wheel Quick
Card, Single-piece and Multi-piece Rim Wheel Fact Sheet, Protecting
Mechanics Working on Power Equipment in the Yard at Marine Terminals
Quick Card, and the Mechanics Working in the Yard in Marine Cargo
Terminals Quick Card) are currently being reviewed by OSHA’s
writer/editor.  Three guidance products (Working on the Apron or
Highline Quick Card, Traffic Lanes and Safety Zones Fact Sheet, and the
Fire Watch Quick Card) are in the official OSHA review process.

   

Ms. Dougherty also thanked Joe Daddura for his hard work as the
Designated Federal Official (DFO) for the Committee.  She informed the
Committee that this is Mr. Daddura’s last MACOSH meeting because,
after 20 years of Federal service, Mr. Daddura will be retiring in
December.  

Review of July 21, 2011 the MACOSH Meeting Minutes

San Diego, CA

Ms. Brinkerhoff addressed remarks that had been made at the July 2011
MACOSH meeting by Polly Parks, a member of the public.  Ms. Parks had
pointed out that a remark she had made at the April 2011 MACOSH meeting
in response to an OSHA staff member’s presentation had not been
included in the minutes of that meeting.  Ms. Brinkerhoff informed the
Committee and the public that the Federal Advisory Committee Act
requires an accurate and complete description of matters discussed and
conclusions reached.  Specifically, the focus of the minutes should be
the discussions of the Committee members and any recommendations or
decisions that the Committee makes.  The presentations that are given to
the Committee by OSHA staff are informative but do not go to the mission
of the Committee.  Thus, those presentations are not given as much time
or space in the minutes because they are not directly related to what
the Committee is doing at the particular meeting.  However, as Ms. 
Brinkerhoff noted, all MACOSH meetings are transcribed in full and
verbatim by a court reporter and are available for public view at 
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov" www.regulations.gov .  

Mr. Thornton continued the discussion of the meeting minutes and asked
the Committee to provide comments.  Two members (Ken Smith and Lesley
Johnson) were listed as being present at the meeting when in fact they
were not there.  One member (Michael Flynn) was not listed as being
present at the meeting although he was present.  Jack Reich, OSHA Region
9, noted that although the minutes indicated that BAE systems received
certification for VPP, BAE is being reviewed for recertification.  The
Committee unanimously voted to accept the amendments to the meeting
minutes.  The un-amended minutes from July 20, 2011, MACOSH meeting,
were entered into the record at Docket Number OSHA-2011-0007 as Exhibit
23.

 

Directorate of Cooperative and State Programs

LeeAnn Jillings

Ms. Jillings started her presentation with a brief overview of her
office’s responsibilities:

Office of Services and Alliances – Responsible for the Alliance
Program and compliance assistance and outreach efforts.  

Office of Partnership and Recognition – Responsible for OSHA's
Voluntary Protection Programs, OSHA Challenge, and the Strategic
Partnership program, all of which have maritime industry involvement.  

Office of Small Business Assistance – Responsible for the On-Site
Consultation Program, as well as general outreach to the small business
community.  

Office of State Programs – Oversees the administration of the
state-plan states around the country.

She then described a number of topics that her office is involved with:

Cooperative program statistics – At the end of August there were 2,463
active participants in the Voluntary Protection Program; 197
participating organizations in the OSHA Challenge Program; 94 Strategic
Partnerships; nearly 1,600 SHARP sites (recognition program for On-Site
Consultation); and 325 active Alliances.  Between 2010 and 2011 there
has been stabilization in the growth of active participant in the
program.  The maritime industry is active in OSHA’s Cooperative
Programs.  BAE is involved in the VPP program, and there are 15 other
maritime industry sites currently recognized in the VPP.  There are two
OSHA Challenge sites in the maritime industry and three graduates.  Two
Strategic Partnership agreements are active regionally at this time, and
one National Alliance Agreement is currently in place for the maritime
industry.  The Department has signed several letters of agreement with
various countries such as, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and other
countries, focusing on worker safety and health efforts.  The Agency is
using Alliances in its efforts to collaborate with the local level
through Consulates of these countries to help workers understand their
rights as well as hazard exposure and protection from those hazards in
the workplace.  OSHA is also increasing efforts in working with
community and faith-based organizations, local unions, and other
non-traditional and nonprofit groups.  

Voluntary Protection Program -- In 2009, the General Accounting Office
came out with a study on VPP, which pointed out a number of ways to
improve the administration of the program.  The Agency established a VPP
Review Work Group that is actively addressing those recommendations. 
Both the 2004 GAO study and the 2009 study suggested that the Agency
look at how the VPP program fits into and supports the Agency's goals
and mission.  The Review Work Group is doing a top-to-bottom review of
VPP.  This fall, OSHA will develop a report for Agency leadership.  

OSHA Challenge Program – OSHA also conducted a review of this
program’s administration in the last year, predominantly focusing on
data integrity.  The Challenge Program leverages and engages outside
organizations to work on their own time by volunteering to support
companies and work sites.  OSHA expects administrators in the program to
turn in certain information every year to OSHA so that the Agency can
track participants and provide data related to the program’s impact on
employers’ development and implementation of a safety and health
program, on its illness and injury rates, and on overall performance.  

National Partnerships – There are 94 strategic partnerships
nationwide.  Of those 94, three are national.  The other 91 are Regional
and Area offices.  Most of those regional and area office partnerships
are predominantly in the Construction industry.  However, there are two
in the maritime industry (Crowley Petroleum Distribution and the
Virginia Ship Repair Association).  OSHA also conducted a review of the
Strategic Partnership Program to ensure National, Regional, and Area
office partnerships were following directive or established policies and
procedures.  Last October, OSHA implemented a revised penalty policy. 
The program eliminated one of the enforcement benefits offered to
Strategic Partnership Program participants, which was the 10% penalty
reduction.  OSHA is continuing to work with the regions to receive
timely information on the impact of their partnerships and the annual
review process.  

On-Site Consultation – This program is aimed at small and medium-size
businesses and high-hazard industries.  The program provides free and
confidential services to these employers.  Each year the program
conducts approximately 30,000 visits across the country.  Most of the
businesses are very small, with 1 to 25 workers.

Q:  Mr. Thornton asked if the On-Site Consultation Program is the same
as the 7C1 Program.

A:  Ms. Jillings responded that the On-Site Consultation Program is the
same as the 7C1 Program, but Congress passed legislation, signed into
law, that made it the 21D.

Q: Mr. Thornton also asked if the program is offered whether a State is
a State-plan State, or a Federal OSHA State.

A:  Ms. Jillings explained that the program is offered in all States and
territories.

High-Hazard Industries – Construction is a high-hazard industry, and
construction activities are performed at maritime work sites.  Each year
a number of shipbuilding facilities take advantage of on-site
consultation services.  OSHA is looking at ways to target consultations
at high-hazard industries, including those that received OSHA’s hazard
alert letters.  The Department of Labor awarded a three-year contract to
evaluate the effects of consultations.  

Promoting On-Site Consultation – OSHA is looking at looking at a
number of ways to promote the program’s availability and successes. 
OSHA conducted a number of national conferences, which included
workshops, speakers from projects, employers, and Regional and National
Office staff, American Society of Safety Engineers, Voluntary Protection
Programs, and others.  OSHA will also give a presentation at the
upcoming National Safety Conference.  

The OSHA Quick Takes – This initiative includes success stories about
Consultation and SHARP sites.  The Consultation and Small Business web
pages have been redesigned to make them more user-friendly.  

State Programs -- Over 40% of the nation’s workplaces are located in
State-plan States; those States may enforce their own safety and health
regulations, as long as those regulations are “at least as
effective” as OSHA’s standards in providing safe and healthful
employment and places of employment.  Those States conducted just over
57,000 inspections last year.  Federal inspections are around 40,000 per
year.  The States are issuing more violations but are not citing as many
serious violations as Federal OSHA.  In March of 2011, the Office of the
Inspector General (OIG) issued a study that compared the effectiveness
of State plans versus Federal OSHA.  That study resulted in a work group
that is looking at how to define “at least as effective.”  

Q:  Mr. Thornton asked if the work group will look at injury rates and
penalties.

A:  Ms. Jillings stated that the work group will look at the States’
overall program approach and a variety of other measures.

Ms. Jillings concluded her presentation, and the PowerPoint presentation
entitled “Directorate of Cooperative and State Programs Update,
September 21, 2011 by LeeAnn Jillings” was entered into OSHA docket
number OSHA-0007-2011 as Exhibit 24.

Region 1 Presentation

Bill Coffin

Mr. Coffin welcomed the Committee to Portland and conveyed regrets from
Regional Director, Marthe Kent.

Mr. Coffin stated that Portland has more VPP employers and SHARP sites
than any other area office in New England.  The Portland area office
conducts a lot of work with its State counterpart, the 21D Consultation
Program.  As of July 1, 2011, a new local emphasis program (LEP) was
initiated dealing with ship- and boat-building and repair.  Region 1 has
identified and contacted 197 shipyards and boat yards in the state of
Maine.  The 197 employers range from small employers with two or three
workers to large industrial employers, which include General Dynamics
and Bath Iron Works.  The last LEP was issued about 12 to 15 years ago. 


Q:  Mr. Thornton asked how many employees work at the 197 shipyard and
boat yards in the state of Maine.

A:  Mr. Coffin stated that he would have a hard time providing a total
number of employees, although he noted that Bath iron Works, which is
the largest industrial employer in the State, has between 4,000 and
5,000 employees.   Some of the other 196 shipyards and boatyards are
two-person operations.

Q:  Tim Podue (MACOSH member) asked if there are any longshoring and
container operations in the State.

A:  Mr. Coffin explained that most of the longshoring is in Portland,
which also has handles crude oil that goes by pipeline to Montreal for
refining.  Other operations further north involve liquefied natural gas,
which is brought in by tankers.  Container operations are increasing in
Portland.

Shipyard Workgroup Report 

Don Raffo (Workgroup Chair)

Since the last meeting, the Shipyard Workgroup conducted two conference
calls, in which all the workgroup members participated. 

Ventilation Fact Sheet -- At the start of this MACOSH charter, the
agency requested the workgroup to review a ventilation fact sheet that
was carried over from the previous workgroup.  The workgroup looked at
it in depth, talked about it at the conference calls, and has started to
modify it.  The workgroup felt that it contained too much general
information to be useful to employees and employers.  As an alternative,
the workgroup decided to work on two different products:  a quick card
on ventilation practices for employees working in confined spaces, and
an outline of a guidance document.  The workgroup had discussions with
OSHA on this issue and has informed the Agency that it is a big project,
since it can apply to confined spaces, enclosed spaces, and open spaces,
and can involve good ventilation practices, when it is required, and the
difference between supply and exhaust ventilation.

Sewage Tanks – This guidance product deals with the safe practices
involved in entry work and repair to these unique tanks on vessels.  Ed
Woolworth gave a presentation to the workgroup on the issues involved in
sewage tank entry and repair work.  Mr. Woolworth provided information
and described some incidents that have happened, including fatalities,
and gave the workgroup some overviews on atmospheric hazards, biological
hazards, and flammability hazards that are found in these spaces.  His
discussion concentrated on naval vessels, but also included other
vessels and an overview of some of the hazards that would occur on any
type of vessel.  Mr. Dovinh is refining a guidance document on sewage
tanks.  The workgroup started out with a fact sheet, which spawned a
guidance document.  Mr. Dovinh has been working on the fact sheet and
the guidance document at the same time and presented the fact sheet to
the workgroup for review during the workgroup meeting.  The shipyard
workgroup will be working on that fact sheet and will provide it to the
longshore workgroup to review before the next meeting.  

Welding Shade Fact Sheet – OSHA asked the workgroup to look at this
document, which had been drafted by Agency staff.  This fact sheet was a
carry-over item from the previous workgroup and deals with welding shade
lenses to be used during different types of welding operations.  The
workgroup discussed and made several significant changes to the document
during the workgroup conference calls. Mr. Raffo thanked Mr. Johnson for
his hard work on the fact sheet.  The longshoring workgroup provided
their comments.  The shipyard workgroup reviewed the comments during the
workgroup meeting and incorporated all the comments provided by the
longshoring workgroup.  The document entitled “Eye Protection against
Radiant Energy for Welding in Shipyard Employment” was approved by the
Committee for submission to the Agency and was entered into docket
number OSHA-0007-2011 as Exhibit 26.

Eye Injury reduction – This topic came out of this charter’s initial
meeting as a topic the workgroup should look into.  The workgroup
discussion focused on eye injuries, which account for approximately 10%
of reportable injuries in shipyards.  The workgroup had a lengthy
discussion on how to reduce eye injuries in shipyard employment.  The
discussion included types of PPE, engineering practices, proper removal
of eyewear, enforcement of eye protection, and hazard assessment.  Mr.
Johnson brought in some new types of safety glasses that have a sponge
support around them that provides a tighter seal around the eyes.  The
workgroup is developing an outline of the topics to be covered in a
white paper. The outline will provide evidence that this type of injury
continues to be an issue.  The outline will also provide to the Agency
some of the best industry practices to prevent eye injuries and will
describe best methods to disseminate information to the industry.  Mr.
Thornton will lead this project.  Mr. Thornton also stated that eye
injury continues to be in the 10% range of all injuries, providing
MACOSH the opportunity to make a dent in injury rates. 

Hot Work on Hollow Structures – This topic came from the longshoring
workgroup during a previous MACOSH meeting.  Since the shipyard
workgroup had more experience with the topic, the shipyard workgroup
volunteered to develop a draft fact sheet.  The document the shipyard
workgroup developed mainly covered shipyard issues, but it may be useful
to the longshoring workgroup in developing a fact sheet specific to the
marine terminal industry. The shipyard workgroup would like to modify
the guidance products to cover both longshoring and shipyards as an
educational or awareness document to make people aware of the hazards of
hollow structures.  The guidance products can also be applicable to
landside applications.  The shipyard workgroup will work with the
longshore workgroup to make the document maritime-specific.

  

SHIPS Documents (Safety and Health Information Prevention Sheets) -- 
OSHA had previously asked the workgroup to look at five SHIPS documents
to see if the documents were useful to the industry.  Mr. Raffo
consulted with several shipyard employers to see if the documents were
useful and found that the majority of the larger shipyards did not find
the information useful to them.  However, the smaller shipyards found
the SHIPS documents to be useful.  The workgroup suggested that they
continue to work with OSHA to develop a document that is useful to the
industry.  Mr. Thornton commented that although Mr. Raffo reached out to
the Shipbuilders Council of America, which represents medium to larger
shipyards, the work of the workgroup is pertinent to small, medium, and
large shipyard employers, and the products produced by the workgroup is
useful to all shipyard employers .  

Person-in-the-Water (PIW) Document – During discussions with the two
workgroups, it was recognized that the information in the in the PIW
document is applicable to shipyards as well as marine terminals.

Mr. Raffo concluded the shipyard workgroup report, and the document
entitled “MACOSH Shipyard Workgroup Report-out” was entered into
docket number OSHA-0007-2011 as Exhibit 25.

Longshoring Workgroup Report

Charles Lemon, Acting Chair

PIW (Person in the Water) Guidance Document and Quick Card -- As
written, the quick card applies basically to the longshoring industry. 
The two workgroups discussed the documents and the changes that were
incorporated into it.  The Committee decided to change the documents to
make them applicable to the maritime industry in general, not just
longshoring. 

Container Handling Equipment – The workgroup expected to produce a
series of quick cards that will address the perspective of the person
working around container handlers, including top handlers, side
handlers, semi tractors, etc.  The workgroup is also considering
developing a quick card for straddle carriers as one of the series.  The
longshoring workgroup provided the shipyard workgroup with three quick
cards for review:  (1) Semi-Tractor Tip Over – This quick card deals
with preventing semi-tractors from tipping over in marine terminals; (2)
Top/side Handler Operation Safety – This quick card deals with making
employers and employees aware of the dangers of traffic patterns and
moving vehicles (top/side handlers) while working in marine terminals;
and (3) Stay Focused on Safety While Working on or around Cargo Handling
Equipment – This quick card is designed remind longshore workers, or
make them aware, of the different hazards they are exposed to while
working on or near cargo handling equipment in marine terminals.   

Q:  Mr. Daddura asked if the semi-tractor tip-over quick card addressed
safety on state roads, and if the workgroup is working on distracted
driving.

A:  Mr. Lemon stated that the workgroup did not discuss distracted
driving and that there are several contributing factors especially on
tip-overs.  The document is focused on awareness, not necessarily for
the equipment operator rather but for persons working around this
equipment.

Q:  Mr. Thornton asked if the reference to topside handlers in the
proposed quick card is the same as straddle buggies.

A:  Mr. Lemon stated that the workgroup has not started on the straddle
carriers quick card and that the discussion of the workgroup was that
not a lot of terminals use straddle carriers anymore, but the workgroup
is going to explore whether there would be a demand for it.

Q:  Mr. Thornton suggested if the longshoring workgroup chooses to
develop the quick card, they might consider developing it as an
industry-wide product.

A:  Mr. Lemon agreed with Mr. Thornton’s statement.  

The remaining items on the longshoring workgroup’s agenda for the
charter are:

Safety Zones between Railcars and Cargo Handling Equipment – The
workgroup is developing a fact sheet and a quick card on this topic. 
The guidance products would recommend a designated space/safety zone
between railcars and cargo handling equipment.  

Preventing Chassis Drivers from Jostling in the Cabs – The workgroup
is just starting to work on this subject.  The quick card and fact sheet
will address containers that are attached to chassis being lifted, and
containers dropped from a height onto chassis.  

PPE Poster or Quick Cards -- The workgroup thought about developing
quick cards that would illustrate various types of PPE for common
working environments at marine terminals.  During the meeting, the
workgroup decided that there is already a lot of information out there
on this topic, so there is no need to develop this product.  The
workgroup decided to take it off its agenda.  

Testing between Deck Pontoon Hatches – This item is being addressed by
the shipyard workgroup in its fact sheet on hot work on hollow and
enclosed structures.  The longshoring workgroup reviewed the draft
document and thought it was well written.  The longshoring workgroup is
looking forward to working with the shipyard workgroup to make it a
maritime industry document.

Combustible Dust in Marine Terminals – The workgroup is reviewing the
OSHA fact sheet/safety alert to see if there are any unique maritime
scenarios for combustible dust that the fact sheet does not address.  If
so, the workgroup will consider drafting a similar document or adding
something to the existing document.  	

Mr. Lemon concluded his presentation and stated that the workgroup will
start to brainstorm for more items to add to the list of work products
because the workgroup will more than likely complete all of their
current work products by the end of the charter.  Mr. Thornton suggested
that both workgroups take stock of their progress with regard to the
work products on their list.

Q:  Mr. Thornton asked if there was any discussion of the I2P2 effort in
either group.

A:  Mr. Lemon stated that the longshoring workgroup discussed I2P2
during their last conference call.  The workgroup found that the Gulf
region and the West Coast already have accident prevention programs.  He
stated that an I2P2 plan in the Gulf area is not necessarily required,
but they have one. However, since the workgroup did not have an East
Coast representative in attendance, or on the conference call, it is not
known what the East Coast is doing on I2P2.  Ms. Welch will contact
terminals or some other resources on the East Coast to find out if they
have I2P2 plans.  If it’s found that the East Coast is lacking in that
area, the workgroup should address it at.  Mr. Raffo stated that the
shipyard workgroup had it on their agenda but did not discuss it during
the workgroup meetings. However, they will keep it on their agenda.  The
shipyard workgroup plans to cooperate with OSHA’s efforts on I2P2,
because the maritime industry seems to be a good prototype. 

Mr. Thornton suggested that the Committee discuss ways they can
contribute, or if they want to contribute, to the I2P2 efforts.   Mr.
Lemon commented that the longshoring workgroup was not certain about
what the Agency wanted from them, so they invited Mike Seymour to attend
one of their prior conference calls.  During that conference call, Mr.
Seymour told the workgroup that he was not looking to try to reinvent an
already-existing successful I2P2 program.  Mr. Thornton suggested that
the shipyard workgroup also invite Mr. Seymour to sit in on a conference
call with them to give some direction as to what the Agency needs from
MACOSH and what elements the Agency is looking for in an I2P2 program.

Mr. Lemon concluded the longshoring workgroup report. The document
entitled “The Longshoring Workgroup Report” dated September 21,
2011, was entered into docket OSHA-0007-2011 as Exhibit 27.

Open Discussion

MACOSH Committee

 Mr. Thornton opened the floor for discussion and asked the Committee
and the public if there was a maritime workplace safety issue that
should be addressed.    

Ms. Brinkerhoff stated that the longshoring workgroup suggested they
develop some sort of document for longshoremen who work with logs,
because that operation is very hazardous and has not been addressed by
OSHA.  

Mr. Raffo stated that he would like OSHA to give a presentation to the
Committee as to what happens to the products produced by the Committee
once they are given to OSHA.  He would like to learn about the OSHA
clearance process and what, if anything, the Committee could do to help
the process along.  The next item Mr. Raffo would like the Committee to
work on is toxic metals.  

Mr. Thornton stated that the Agency was supposed to develop a
spreadsheet to track the progress of guidance documents.  The
spreadsheet would be updated on a regular basis and provide feedback to
the Committee.  Mr. Daddura agreed to provide the Committee with such a
spreadsheet.  Ms. Dougherty addressed the Agency’s efforts to move
guidance documents through the clearance process.  She stated that the
review of documents is based on their priority, how much budget the
Agency has, how they are going to be printed, and when they are going to
be printed.  An internal Agency workgroup called CAG, made up of OSHA
Regional Administrators and OSHA Directorate heads, reviews all the
products across the Agency and makes decisions about which guidance
products should be produced, budget permitting.  The CAG was less active
during the last year or so, but the group has been reconstituted and
things are moving through the CAG review process much faster now.  Ms.
Dougherty also explained several issues that play into the review
process, such as formatting and the review of the writer/editor.  The
writer/editor review is a new process.  After the writer/editor finishes
refining the document at the directorate level, it goes to CAG.  The
Solicitor’s Office reviews the document last, and then it goes to
Communications for printing.  The Agency is leaning towards online
products instead of the laminated quick cards due to cost concerns.  Ms.
Dougherty informed the Committee that she has made the pitch for actual
hard copies of the documents MACOSH submits, but the Agency is debating
that issue.  Hopefully OSHA will have something produced by the next
meeting, or within the next couple of months.  Mr. Thornton asked if
there was any relevance to types of product produced by the Committee
and the time it takes it to clear the Agency.  Ms. Dougherty stated that
it doesn’t really make a difference in the product type, but obviously
a 10-page document compared to a 2-page document is going to take more
time, but not much.  Mr. Podue told Ms. Dougherty that the quick cards
are effective and are targeted at the worker.  He noted that the
laminated ones are good for the workers, and as soon as his workplace
receives them from OSHA, they are all gone.  They make a difference. 
Ms. Dougherty stated that OSHA is interested in more graphic
representation in the guidance products, such as line drawings or
photos.  Mr. Ross asked Ms. Dougherty if she could give a timeframe from
start to finish of a guidance product once MACOSH hands it over to the
Agency.  Ms. Dougherty replied that she couldn’t give a definitive
time frame, because it depended on the priorities of the Agency.  Under
ideal circumstances, it takes about two or three months to get guidance
products through the clearance process.  

Mr. Garber stated that logging operations are something the longshoring
workgroup is interested in working on, but first they need to reach out
to the people in the maritime industry to see what is going on before
they decide to do guidance on logging.  He also stated that he had some
interest in the global harmonization standard (GHS) and how the maritime
industry could comply with the standard.  Ms. Dougherty replied that GHS
is about to enter the final clearance stage.  OSHA held hearings and
heard from numerous people.  OSHA is spending a lot time and effort in
developing rollout material, and OSHA would be happy to give a
presentation on GHS.  

Mr. Lemon stated that he would like to see guidance materials for
mechanics entering confined spaces.  He would also like to see a clear
Agency definition of a dive team and guidance on the proper training for
divers.   

Mr. Godinez stated that he was still concerned that, even under the
current standard, accidents still happen in confined spaces, enclosed
spaces, and open areas.  

Mr. Podue thanked Jack Reich and Ken Atha for their efforts on the West
Coast waterfront.  For several years OSHA was not present on the
waterfront, and their presence has made a huge difference.  

Angelo Costa (OSHA Region 3) stated that he would like to see the
Committee develop something informational on electrical hazards in the
shipyards. 

Susan Swanton, Executive Director of the Maine Marine Trades
Association, asked MACOSH to consider having a member of the
boat-building industry on the Committee the next time the Committee is
reestablished.  

Laura Masterson, Bath Iron Works, stated that Bath Iron Works is one of
the companies that continuously look for ways to protect workers’
eyes.  She also stated that the eye protection issue may be behavioral
as far as those workers wearing prescription eyewear all the time,
versus those people who don't.  

Mr. Thornton suggested the Committee look at the BLS data and focus on
areas where the maritime industry is experiencing the highest number of
injuries when the Committee next considers which products to work on. 
Mr. Thornton also told the Committee to make sure that whatever method
the Committee chooses reaches the intended audience, i.e., quick cards,
fact sheets, and white papers.  The Committee needs to make sure the
information is reaching the audience in a way that will make a
difference or change behaviors.  

Mr. Thornton mentioned that the maritime industry employs people of
various ethnic backgrounds and asked the Committee to consider where
translation of the guidance products makes sense.  

Steve Butler, Director of Maritime Enforcement OSHA, mentioned fall
protection for airlifts when working under water.  

Mr. Lemon suggested that joint conference calls be held with a few
members from each workgroup to discuss documents.  Mr. Raffo suggested
that the workgroups conduct a joint report-out at the end of the
workgroup meetings to help streamline things prior to the full Committee
meeting.  Mr. Ross stated that he agreed with Mr. Raffo’s statement
about the joint workgroup meetings to expedite the progress of guidance
documents within the Committee. 

Final Comments

Chairman Thornton

Mr. Thornton announced the retirement of Joe Daddura.  Mr. Thornton and
Mr. Raffo presented Mr. Daddura with a gift from MACOSH and the Marine
Chemists for his retirement.  The MACOSH Committee and the public
thanked Mr. Daddura for his service to the Committee and wished him well
during his retirement from the Agency.  Mr. Daddura thanked everyone and
wished the Committee well in their efforts to protect working men and
women in the maritime industry.  

The meeting was adjourned at 2 p.m.

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 meeting.

 PAGE   

 PAGE   1 

