Safety Lines

The Newsletter of Minnesota OSHA

Number 39 Spring 2003
http://www.doli.state.mn.us

MNOSHA recognizes New Ulm Medical Center; 11th MNSTAR worksite

New Ulm Medical Center
was recognized for its
achievements as a MNSTAR
(Minnesota Star) worksite
April 30. Presenting the flag
were: Ken Hickey (far left),
Workplace Safety
Consultation; Robin Kelleher
(second from left), acting
commissioner; Jim Parent
(third from left), former
OSHA consultant and
compliance officer; and New
Ulm Medical Center safety
committee members.

For more about MNSTAR,

visit www.doli.state.mn.us/
mnstar.html on the Web.

Meet new DLI Commissioner Scott Brener

In April, Governor Tim Pawlenty appointed Scott Brener as the new
commissioner for the Department of Labor and Industry. Brener has served
most recently as a government and regulatory affairs’ consultant.

“Minnesota businesses and workers rely on this department to establish and

ensure compliance with proper labor practices and standards,” said Pawlenty.
“I am confident in Scott’s experience and abilities in this area. He has worked
within state government, as well as with private-sector groups, to solve the very
issues the department deals with on a daily basis. Commissioner Scott Brener

“I share a deep-rooted affinity with the department in terms of its personnel and its policies,” Brener said. “I look
forward to working as a member of the Pawlenty administration to further the safety and protection of Minnesota’s
workers.”

For more information about Brener and DLI, visit www.doli.state.mn.us/brenerappointed.html.

 By Pat Lorentz, Management Analyst

Guidelines to help the nursing-home industry

prevent ergonomic injuries to their employees
were published by federal OSHA in March.
OSHA’s Guidelines for Nursing Homes
focuses on practical recommendations for
employers to reduce the number and severity
of workplace injuries by using methods found
to be successful in the nursing-home
environment.

The guidelines reflect best practices for tackling

ergonomics problems in the nursing-home
industry. Information for the guidelines came
from numerous sources, including existing
practices and programs, trade and professional
associations, labor organizations, the medical
community, individual firms, state OSHA
programs and available scientific information.

The guidelines are divided into five sections:

developing a process for protecting workers;
identifying problems and implementing
solutions for resident lifting and repositioning; identifying problems and implementing solutions for activities other
than resident lifting and repositioning; training; and additional sources of information.

Implementation of specific measures or guidelines may differ

from site to site; however, OSHA recommends that all
facilities minimize manual lifting of residents in all cases and
eliminate such lifting when feasible. The guidelines present OSHA recommends that
22 descriptive examples (with illustrations) of options that
a facility can use. Many are simple, common sense all facilities minimize
modifications to equipment or procedures that do not require manual lifting of
a lot of time or resources. The represented categories
include: transfer from sitting to standing position; resident residents in all cases and
lifting; ambulation; lateral transfer; repositioning in a chair; eliminate such lifting
and weighing, bathtub and shower activities. The guidelines
also include questions designed to aid in the selection of when feasible.
equipment (as well as a supplier) that best meets the needs
of an individual nursing home. jdsfsd sfafj sjfadfj sdjfds

Safety Lines 2 Spring 2003

OSHA also encourages employers to implement a basic
ergonomics process that provides management support
while involving workers, identifying problems and
implementing solutions, addressing reports of injuries,
providing training and evaluating ergonomic efforts.

The guidelines are designed specifically for the nursing-

home industry to help reduce the number and severity
of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in
their facilities. MSDs include conditions such as low back
pain, sciatica, rotator cuff injuries, epicondylitis and carpal
tunnel syndrome. Employers with similar work
environments, such as assisted living centers, homes for
the disabled, homes for the aged and hospitals, may also find the information useful.

The guidelines include additional sources (including accessible Web sites) for those seeking more information
about ergonomics and the prevention of work-related MSDs in nursing homes. Also included is A Nursing Home
Case Study, based on information provided by Wyandot County Nursing Home in Upper Sandusky, Ohio. Wyandot
used a process that reflects many of the recommendations in these guidelines to address safety and health concerns.

The Guidelines for Nursing Homes are available on the federal OSHA Website at www.osha.gov/ergonomics/
guidelines/nursinghome/index.html. A copy of the guidelines may also be ordered by calling OSHA at
1-800-321-OSHA.

Safety Lines is a free quarterly publication of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry. Its purpose is to promote occupational safety
and health and to inform readers of the purpose, plans and progress of MNOSHA. Questions, comments and story submissions are
welcome. News material may be reproduced provided the department is contacted and credited.

Send comments, submissions and subscription requests to: Jenny O’Brien, editor, Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry,
443 Lafayette Road N., St. Paul, MN 55155; phone (651) 284-5261; e-mail DLI.Communications@state.mn.us.

This material can be provided in different formats, such as Braille, large

print or audiotape, by calling Minnesota OSHA at (651) 284-5050 or
(651) 297-4198/TTY.

Safety Lines 3 Spring 2003

 Grain industry safer with OSHA standard
By Pat Lorentz, Management Analyst

Federal OSHA Administrator John Henshaw recently announced that a

regulatory review of the Grain Handling Facilities standard confirms it is
helping to save lives and has not had a negative effect on the industry. Since
the standard’s adoption in 1987, there were 70 percent fewer fatalities and
55 percent fewer injuries from grain explosions, and the number of grain
suffocations went down 44 percent. The regulatory review was conducted
to determine if the standard is needed and if it should be amended. Minnesota
OSHA adopted the Grain Handling Facilities standard in 1988.

Although the regulatory review found that no major changes have occurred
in technological, economic or other factors that would warrant a substantial
revision of the standard, it did point out some particular clarifications and
minor changes that could be made to assist in compliance with the standard.
Based on comments received as part of the review, OSHA will issue
clarifications and consider possible improvements to the standard, including
whether the confined-space requirements of the Grain Handling Facilities
standard should apply to all areas of grain storage facilities currently covered
by the general confined-spaces standard. OSHA will also consider updating
references to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) requirements
that are currently in the standard.

The Grain Handling Facilities standard focuses on requirements for

controlling grain fires, grain dust explosions and hazards associated with
entry into bins, silos and tanks. Grain mills and grain elevators are the major
sectors affected by the standard.

A summary of the report was published in the March 14, 2003, Federal
Register – which is available on the federal OSHA Web site at
www.osha.gov. The full regulatory report will also be available on the federal
OSHA Web site shortly. A printed copy of the full report may be obtained
by contacting OSHA at 1-800-321-OSHA.

Safety Lines 4 Spring 2003

Changing menu: Construction Breakfast jams Minnesota Room
By Gary Robertson, Training Officer

Change is coming to the Minnesota OSHA Construction program that it’s hard to hear the speaker from all parts
Breakfast program next fall, due to the popularity of the of the room. When the microphone volume is increased,
breakfast safety-seminars – we have had to turn down a high-pitched shrill that only a cat on a backyard fence
reservations and turn people away at the door. The could appreciate, causes cringing pain and chipped teeth.
Minnesota Room at the Department of Labor and
Industry is just too small for our current needs. Finally, what can be said about the parking space at
Labor and Industry ... or lack thereof? At the beginning
This successful program allows the people who are of each program, an announcement is made to have
responsible for construction-worksite safety to keep someone “please remove your truck” from this lot and
current with MNOSHA standards and rules. It is a time put in that lot (which could already be full and is why the
to discuss and share, with the speaker and the other truck was parked in the other lot in the first place). Keep
attendees, ideas to improve worker safety throughout in mind that making this announcement is a very
Minnesota’s construction industry. Participants are precarious task when one is addressing a room of
encouraged to ask questions, give opinions, express construction people, early in the morning, who have just
safety concerns and continue to nurture a respectable had a chance to take their first bite of breakfast.
and open relationship between MNOSHA and the
construction industry. And it’s the participation of the Everything considered, these are wonderful problems
people who live and work each day in this industry that to have. They are a way of expressing the importance of
is the reason for the program’s success and, ultimately, the construction program. Keeping safety at the forefront
the education and safety of Minnesota’s working people. of our thoughts and at our worksites is a noble use of
time and effort, and underscores the value of the
The Minnesota Room can safely hold about 70 people. Construction Breakfast program. Hearing about and
Safely yes, comfortably no. When the room is at capacity, discussing topics that can reduce the causes of employee
some interesting and problematic situations occur, and injuries and illnesses, and having employees return home
are pointedly communicated. An attendee’s skills at safely each night, is the program’s solemn purpose.
playing hide-and-seek with the room’s pillars and the
food lines come into play if one wishes to see the speaker. Finding a better location that will satisfy the growing
It’s easy to tell who the “old timers” are: they arrive needs of this program is underway. Several locations
early, get the choice seats, and have the first crack at the have been suggested and are being considered. Due to
chow and hot coffee. current state-budget restraints and other concerns, the
final location choice will need to be on state property
Reading lips is another important requirement – especially and in the metro area. Stay tuned to MNOSH’s Web
for late arrivals who must sit toward the middle or back page (www.doli.state.mn.us/mnosha.html) for updates
of the room. It has been mentioned at most every and a schedule.

Safety Lines 5 Spring 2003

MNOSHA continues two inspection-priorities: silica, lead
by Alden Hoffman, Industrial Hygiene Manager

Minnesota OSHA’s industrial hygienists continue their exposure, whereas chronic silicosis usually develops
inspection priorities in two national emphasis programs, after 10 or more years of exposure.
silica and lead.
Federal OSHA estimates that more than one million U.S.
Silica hazards workers are exposed to crystalline silica and, each year,
Silicosis is one of the world’s oldest known more than 250 die from silicosis. The disease is
occupational diseases, with reports dating back to completely preventable if employers, workers and health
ancient Greece. Since the 1800s, the silicotic health professionals work together to reduce exposures.
problems associated with crystalline silica dust
exposure have been referred to under a variety of Symptoms of silicosis include shortness of breath, fever
common names including: consumption, ganister and occasional bluish skin at the lips and ear lobes.
disease, grinders’ asthma, grinders’ dust consumption, Advanced silicosis can result in extreme shortness of
grinders’ rot, grit consumption, masons’ disease, breath, loss of appetite, chest pain, increased
miner’s asthma, miner’s phthisis, potters’ rot, sewer susceptibility to infectious diseases of the lungs,
disease, stonemason’s disease, chalicosis and respiratory failure and death.
shistosis. Silicosis was considered the most serious
occupational hazard during the 1930s, and was the Other diseases associated with the inhalation of silica-
focus of major federal, state and professional attention containing dusts include chronic airways obstruction and
during this time. The hazard is still present more than bronchitis, tuberculosis and several extrapulmonary
60 years later. diseases. The International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC) has identified silica as a potential human
The main health-hazard associated with exposure to carcinogen.
silica is silicosis, a scarring of the lungs that reduces
the lungs’ ability to extract oxygen from the air. Federal OSHA has identified sandblasting as the source
Silicosis, which is incurable, can be acute or chronic. of the most severe exposures to crystalline silica. Other
Acute silicosis may occur after short periods of activities and industries that may expose workers to
crystalline silica include: jack hammering; rock/well
drilling; concrete mixing and drilling; brick/concrete-block
cutting and sawing; tunneling operations; repair or
replacement of linings of rotary kilns and cupola furnaces;
setting, laying and repair of railroad track; stone cutting;
electronics industry; foundry industries; ceramics, clay
and pottery; stone; glass industries; slate and flint
quarrying; flint crushing; use and manufacture of
abrasives; manufacture of soaps and detergents;
agriculture; food processing operations where crops such
as potatoes and beans are readied for market; and
maritime and mining industries.

Employers and employees can reduce exposure to silica

by:

• using engineering controls such as water sprays,

ventilation and material substitution;
Safety Lines 6 Spring 2003
• not smoking; it can increase the risk to employees
exposed to airborne silica;

• using type-CE positive-pressure abrasive-blasting

respirators when sandblasting;

• properly using a respirator approved for crystalline

silica-containing dust when performing operations
requiring respiratory protection;

• changing into disposable or washable work-clothes at blasting, etc., on lead paint surfaces; most smelter
the site and showering after their use; and operations, either as a trace contaminant or as a major
product; secondary lead smelters where lead is recovered
• not eating, drinking, using tobacco or applying cosmetics from batteries; radiator repair shops; and firing ranges.
in areas where crystalline silica dust is present and Oral ingestion may represent a major route of exposure
washing faces and hands before doing any of the above. in contaminated workplaces. Most exposures occur with
inorganic lead. Organic (tetraethyl and tetramethyl) lead,
While OSHA requires employers to reduce silica which was added to gasoline up until the late 1970s, is
exposures below the permissible exposure limit or not commonly encountered. Organic forms may be
implement an abatement program with interim protection, absorbed through the skin, while inorganic forms cannot.
OSHA and NIOSH also recommend that employers
implement silicosis prevention programs that include Inorganic lead is not metabolized, but is directly
personal air monitoring, employee training, housekeeping, absorbed, distributed and excreted. The rate depends
medical surveillance (based on length of employment), on its chemical and physical form and on the physiological
respiratory protection programs and clothing change characteristics of the exposed person (e.g. nutritional
areas and showers. status and age). Once in the blood, lead is distributed
primarily among three compartments – blood, soft tissue
Lead (kidney, bone marrow, liver and brain) and mineralizing
Overexposure to lead is one of the most common tissue (bones and teeth). Absorption via the
overexposures found in industry. Lead overexposure is gastrointestinal tract following ingestion is highly
a leading cause of workplace illness. Therefore, OSHA dependent upon presence of levels of calcium, iron, fats
has established the reduction of lead exposure to be a and proteins.
high strategic-priority.
MNOSHA’s emphasis inspection program for lead is
In general populations, lead may be present at hazardous based on a variety of sources. Federal OSHA identified
concentrations in food, water and air. Sources include several industries with the potential for lead exposure.
paint, urban dust and folk remedies. It is also a major MNOSHA worked with the Minnesota Department of
potential public health risk. Lead poisoning is the leading Health to identify other industries. In addition, experience
environmentally induced illness in children. At greatest of its own investigators was reviewed to select other
risk are children less than the age of six, because they industries. Among the industries included are: foundries,
are undergoing rapid neurological and physical firing ranges and stained-glass operations. Employers
development. with employees who have a potential for lead exposure
should review the requirements found in existing OSHA
Lead is commonly added to industrial paints because of standards – 1910.1025 for general industry and 1926.62
its characteristic to resist corrosion. Industries with for the construction industry.
particularly high potential-exposures include:
construction work involving welding, cutting, brazing, Information from federal OSHA was used in
this story. Visit www.osha.gov to learn more.
Safety Lines 7 Spring 2003
Research highlights: Minnesota Safety Report
By Brian Zaidman, Research Analyst
Research and Statistics

The Department of Labor and Industry (DLI), Research and Statistics unit, has released the Minnesota Workplace
Safety Report, detailing injury and illness rates and workplace fatalities for 2001. The report is based on the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses and the Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries (CFOI). The Research and Statistics unit collects the Minnesota data for the BLS survey
and the CFOI.

Highlights of the report are presented here; the entire report is on the DLI Web site at www.doli.state.mn.us/
rsreport.html. A printed copy of the report can be ordered by calling the workers’ compensation publications line
at (651) 284-5030.

Nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses

• Minnesota’s total rate of workplace injuries and illnesses dropped from 6.8 per 100 full-time-equivalent (FTE)
workers in 1999 and 2000, to 6.2 cases in 2001. This is Minnesota’s lowest rate in the history of the state survey.
(See Figure 1, below.)

Figure 1
Injury and illness case-incidence rates, Minnesota, 1985-2001 1

10

8
Total cases
Cases per 100 FTE workers

6
Cases without lost workdays

Lost-workday cases
Days-away-from-work cases
2

Cases with restricted work activity only

0
'85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01

1. Includes injuries and illnesses in the private sector and state and local government.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses .

Safety Lines 8 Spring 2003

• The rate of cases with lost workdays (days away from work or restricted work activity) decreased from 3.4 per
100 FTE workers in 2000 to 3.0 in 2001.

• The rate of cases with days away from work fell steadily from 1.9 in 2000, to 1.7 in 2001.

• Minnesota’s total and lost-workday case rates were below the total U.S. rates until the early 1990s, but have
been significantly above the U.S. rates since 1996. For the private sector in 2000, the total case rate was 6.3 for
the state versus 5.7 for the nation. The rate of cases with lost workdays was 3.1 for the state versus 2.8 for the
nation.

• Minnesota’s rate of cases with days away from work was roughly equal to the national rate starting in 1996. In
2001, the private-sector rate of cases with days away from work was 1.7 for the state and the nation.

• Data for 2001 indicates that among industry divisions (the broadest industry grouping), Minnesota’s highest total
injury and illness rates per 100 FTE workers were in: 1. construction (10.7); 2. agriculture, forestry and fishing
(8.3); and 3. manufacturing (7.9).

• Six of the 10 industries with the highest total case rates were in the manufacturing division. The average rate for
the 10 highest industries fell from 15.7 cases in 2000, to 12.8 in 2001. (See Figure 2, below.)

Fatal occupational injuries

The CFOI covers all fatal work-injuries in the private and public sectors, regardless of program coverage; thus, it
includes federal workers and self-employed workers, along with all others. However, fatal illnesses (such as
asbestosis) are excluded.

• In 2001, 76 Minnesotans were fatally injured on the job.

Figure 2
Industry groups with the highest total
case rates, Minnesota, 2001
Total case
Industry
Transportation equipment manufacturing
Furniture and fixtures manufacturing
Lumber and wood-products manufacturing
Agricultural production -- livestock
General building contractors
Food and kindred products manufacturing
Special trade contractors
Local government health services
Rubber and misc. plastics manufacturing
Fabricated metal products manufacturing
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses .
For 1997 through 2001, Minnesota had an average of 78
fatal work injuries a year, consisting of 57 wage-and-salary
workers and 21 self-employed workers. In recent years,
the number of fatalities for self-employed workers has
decreased, while fatalities for wage-and-salary workers have
rate
21.1
remained steady.
17.8
13.3 • Among industry divisions, the highest average number of
12.1 fatal injuries a year for 1997 through 2001 were in: 1.
11.7 agriculture, forestry and fishing (18.0); 2. construction (14.8);
10.8 3. transportation and public utilities (11.2); and 4.
10.7
manufacturing (10.0).
10.4
9.9
9.9 • The most frequent causes of Minnesota’s fatal work injuries
for 1997 through 2001 were: 1. transportation accidents
(46 percent); 2. contact with objects and equipment (25
percent); and 3. falls (14 percent).

Safety Lines 9 Spring 2003

 Minnesota OSHA survey results favorable

By Kelly Taylor, Program Administrator

In keeping with Minnesota OSHA’s ongoing efforts to improve collaboration

with its stakeholders, surveys were conducted to assess stakeholders’
perceptions of MNOSHA’s impact on safety and health in the workplace. A
survey of a random sample of employers inspected by MNOSHA was conducted
in October 2001. In January 2003, a survey of employees interviewed during
the course of an inspection was conducted. The respondents in both surveys
were asked to rate their experience with a MNOSHA inspection in several
different areas, including knowledge and professionalism of the inspector
conducting the inspection, explanation of the rights and duties as employees
and employers in Minnesota, and the impact of the inspection. Additionally,
each group was asked to indicate why an inspection was conducted at their
workplace.

The response rate for employer surveys was much higher (74 percent) than the
employee survey (10 percent). This can be attributed, at least in part, because
employee surveys were handed out during the course of the inspection and
returned anonymously with no follow-up contact with the survey respondent. Conversely, the
employer surveys were mailed to the employer with reminders sent one, three and four weeks
later.

Overall, responses to all survey questions by Types of inspection

both employees and employers were favorable.
The lowest average score for any question
related to the inspector’s knowledge and
conduct was 3.86 on a five-point scale indicating
a very high level of satisfaction or statement
agreement. Likewise, both employers and
employees indicate they believe the inspection
will have a positive impact on improving
workplace safety and health. Responses from
the surveys also demonstrate both groups were
adequately provided information regarding their
rights and responsibilities as employers or
employees in Minnesota during a MNOSHA
inspection. The average score of employees was
slightly higher – at 4.01 – in this category as
compared to that of employers – at 3.47.
One area of apparent confusion among both the
employers and employees surveyed is the reason
an inspection was conducted at his or her
Safety Lines 10
Inspections scheduled by
Minnesota OSHA fall into two
general classifications:
programmed and unprogrammed.
Programmed (planned)
inspections are unannounced and
conducted on the basis of
objective selection criteria.
Unprogrammed inspections are
conducted in response to reports
of alleged hazardous working
conditions at a specific work site
through sources such as
complaints, referrals, accidents
and follow-up inspections.
In 2002, there were 1,958
inspections conducted, 78
percent were programmed.
Spring 2003
workplace. Seventy-nine percent of employees indicated they either “just came up on the list”
or they didn’t know why their workplace was scheduled for an inspection. These results are
consistent with the 53 percent of employers who indicated similar reasons for the MNOSHA
inspection. (See sidebar “MNOSHA inspections” in this edition.) Below are the specific questions
asked on the respective surveys in the areas of inspector knowledge and conduct, and impact
of the inspection.

Survey results

Inspector knowledge and conduct

Employers Average*

How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the inspector’s:

• understanding of your industry? ..................................................................... 3.86

• ability to provide advice about workplace safety? ............................................ 4.05

• willingness to provide advice about workplace safety? ..................................... 4.11

• knowledge of OSHA ....................................................................................... 4.11

Employees

• The inspector looked at the important safety and health issues

at this workplace .............................................................................................. 4.30

• The inspector’s answers to questions were satisfactory .................................... 4.15

• The inspector acted professionally during the inspection .................................. 4.43

Impact of the MNOSHA inspection

Employers Average*

How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the usefulness of the:

• information from the inspection for improving workplace safety and health? ..... 3.96

• inspection in improving workplace safety and health? ...................................... 3.96

Employees

I believe the workplace will be safer after the inspection .................................... 3.76

*5 = best possible score

Safety Lines 11 Spring 2003

MNOSHA customer assistance by phone, Web, more
By Shelly Techar, Management Analyst

Minnesota OSHA is committed to helping customers MNOSHA staff

achieve safe and healthful work conditions by resources; some requests
providing assistance by phone and through outreach are referred to MNOSHA
programs, and by making much of its information Workplace Safety
available on the Department of Labor and Industry Consultation.
(DLI) Web site.
• Construction breakfasts:
By phone MNOSHA presents
Each day MNOSHA safety and health professionals Construction Breakfast
staff phones and assist callers with a variety of topics. seminars about five times a
Some callers wish to file a safety complaint about their year. The breakfasts are
workplace, others want safety information – from very well attended, begin with a
specific to general. Callers range from safety and buffet breakfast and then
health professionals to individuals who are starting a feature a presentation about a specific construction
new business or safety program. In some cases, safety topic. (See related story on page 5.)
information can be provided to callers immediately;
other callers are directed to MNOSHA Workplace On the Web
Safety Consultation or the MNOSHA information on MNOSHA provides a variety of safety and health
the Internet. information on the DLI Web site, including printable
handouts and information about the video library –
Through outreach tapes are available for a free two-week loan. The site
• Trade shows: MNOSHA staffs informational booths also provides links to other Web sites where safety
at several safety and health trade shows each year. and health regulations and other information can be
These events include the Minnesota Safety Council accessed. The number of visitors to the MNOSHA
conference in Minneapolis, and AGC Safety Days in information on the Web rose more than 25 percent
Minneapolis and Duluth. during the first quarter of federal-fiscal-year 2003.

• Presentations: MNOSHA staff members are often For more information, visit the MNOSHA Web pages
requested to speak to organizations or for specific at www.doli.state.mn.us/mnosha.html or call
events. Presentations can be arranged according to MNOSHA at (651) 284-5050.

Safety Lines 12 Spring 2003