DLLR's Division of Labor and Industry

 

Chapter III - General Inspection Procedures - MOSH Field Operations Manual - Maryland Occupational Safety and Health (MOSH)

 

E. Abatement.

1. Period. The abatement period shall be the shortest interval within which the employer can reasonably be expected to correct the violation. An abatement date shall be set forth in the citation as a specific date, not a number of days. When the abatement period is very short (i.e., 5 working days or less), the abatement date shall be set so as to consider a mail delay and the agreed-upon abatement time. When abatement is witnessed by the CO/IH during the inspection, the abatement period shall be "corrected during inspection" on the citation.

2. Reasonable Abatement Date. The establishment of an abatement date requires the exercise of maximum professional judgment on the part of the CO/IH.

a. The exercise of this judgment will generally be based on data found during the inspection and/or whatever subsequent information gathering is deemed necessary. In all cases, the employer shall be asked for any available information relative to the time required to accomplish abatement and/or any factors unique to the employer's operation which may have an affect on the time needed for abatement.

b. All pertinent factors shall be considered in determining what is a reasonable period. The following considerations may be useful in arriving at a decision.

(1) The seriousness of the alleged violation.

(2) The number of exposed employees.

(3) The availability of needed equipment, material, and/or personnel.

(4) The time required for delivery, installation, modification or construction.

(5) The ability of the employer to complete abatement himself or the need to contract for services, parts, or equipment.

(6) Training of personnel.

3. Abatement Periods Exceeding 30 Calendar Days. Abatement periods exceeding 30 calendar days should not normally be necessary, particularly for safety violations. Situations may arise, however, especially for health violations, where additional time is required (e.g., a condition where extensive structural changes are necessary or where new equipment or parts cannot be delivered within 30 calendar days). When an abatement date is granted that is in excess of 30 calendar days, an explanation for this action shall be placed in the official file. Abatement dates in excess of 90 calendar days may be granted by the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative.

4. Verification of Abatement.

a.  CO/IH Responsibilities.

(1) During the opening conference the CO/IH shall explain the advantages of immediate abatement to the employer. No abatement certification/documentation is required for items that are corrected during inspection and so noted on the citation. The CO/IH shall appropriately mark the abatement documentation required field on the 1B. Documentation shall be required for each willful, repeat, failure to correct, or serious violation (with severity of 7 or above) not corrected during the inspection.

(2)  The employer shall be informed of all requirements of abatement certification and documentation during the closing conference. The CO/IH shall advise the employer of those items which will require certification/documentation, and the procedure for doing so. A copy of the regulation should be provided and explained.

(3)  When conducting a follow-up inspection as a result of the employer's failure to submit abatement certification, the CO/IH shall recommend a citation for such under the original case number. (See Chapter VI, Violation of Regulatory Requirements for penalty and classification information.)

(4)  The CO/IH shall provide, at the employer's request, a sample 'warning tag' to use for marking moveable equipment that has been involved in a willful, repeat, or serious violation.

b. Informal Conferee Responsibilities.

(1)  Obtain the abatement certification form from the employer if it has not already been submitted. Review the form for proper completion. If abatement certification is not provided, or is incorrect, instruct the employer regarding the requirements.

(2)  Require documentation of abatement for all citation items marked willful, repeat, or those serious items designated as requiring verification.

(3)  Ensure that employees were notified of abatement efforts by posting, near the place where the violation occurred, a copy or summary of the abatement certification. This is in addition to the requirement for posting of citations. For willful, repeat, or serious violations involving moveable equipment which have not yet been abated, the employer must demonstrate that a warning tag or a copy of the citation was affixed to the equipment.

(4)  Penalty reductions may not be offered for those items which lack proper documentation of abatement.

c. MOSH Administrative Responsibilities.

(1)  Ensure that all citations issued as a result of an inspection are marked to indicate abatement verification requirements. Serious citations having a high gravity rating (7 or above) shall require documentation. Exceptions may be made by the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative to include low gravity serious or other-than-serious citations.

(2).  For those construction cases where abatement certification is not provided by the employer a letter shall be issued. If the employer fails to respond with the appropriate certification within 10 calendar days, a telephone call shall be made to the employer. If certification is not received within 10 calendar days of the telephone call, a citation shall be generated by Operations and mailed to the employer.

(3)  For fixed-site employers who have failed to provide certification, a letter shall be issued. If the employer fails to respond with the appropriate certification within 10 calendar days, a telephone call shall be made to the employer. If certification is not received within 10 calendar days of the telephone call, a follow-up inspection shall be scheduled per existing procedures. A notation shall be made alerting the assigned CO/IH that abatement certification was not provided.

5. Effect of Contest Upon Abatement Period. In situations where an employer contests the citation item(s), the abatement period shall be considered not to have begun until all administrative and court proceedings have been exhausted and have resulted in affirmation of the citation and abatement period. In situations where there is an employee contest of the abatement date, the abatement requirements of the citation remain unchanged.

a. Where an employer has contested only the amount of the proposed penalty, the abatement period continues to run unaffected by the contest.

b. Where the employer does not contest, they must abide by the date set forth in the citation even if such date is within the 15 working day notice of contest period. Therefore, when the abatement period designated in the citation is 15 working days or less and a notice of contest has not been filed, a follow-up inspection of the worksite may be conducted for purposes of determining whether abatement has been achieved within the time period set forth in the citation. A failure to abate citation may be issued on the basis of the CO/IH's findings.

c. Where the employer has filed a notice of contest to the initial citation within the proper contest period, the abatement period does not begin to run until the entry of a final order by the Commissioner. Where the hazards cited in the original citation remain unabated and the process has moved, an inspection may be conducted.

NOTE: If an early abatement date has been designated in the initial citation and it is the opinion of the CO/IH and the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative that a situation classified as imminent danger is presented by the cited condition, appropriate imminent danger proceedings may be initiated notwithstanding the filing of a notice of contest by the employer.

6. Feasible Administrative, Work Practice and Engineering Controls. Where applicable (generally during health inspections), the CO/IH shall discuss control methodology with the employer during the closing conference.

a. Engineering Controls. Engineering controls consist of substitution, isolation, ventilation and equipment modifications.

(1) Substitution may involve process change, equipment replacement or material substitution.

(2) Isolation results in the reduction of the hazard by providing a barrier around the material, equipment, process or employee. This barrier may consist of a physical separation or isolation by distance.

(3) Ventilation controls are more fully disclosed in the IH Technical Manual.

(4) Equipment modification will result in increased performance or change in character, such as the application of sound absorbent material.

b. Administrative Controls. Any procedure which significantly limits daily exposure by control or manipulation of the work schedule or manner in which work is performed is considered a means of administrative control. The use of personal protective equipment is not considered a means of administrative control.

c. Work Practice Controls. Work practice controls are a type of administrative control by which the employer modifies the manner in which the employee performs assigned work. Such modification may result in a reduction of exposure through such methods as changing work habits, improving sanitation and hygiene practices, or making other changes in the way the employee performs the job.

d. Feasibility. Abatement measures required to correct a citation item are feasible when they can be accomplished by the employer. The CO/IH, following current directions and guidelines, shall inform the employer, where appropriate, that a determination will be made as to whether engineering or administrative controls are feasible.

(1) Types of Feasibility. In general there are two types of feasibility determinations that MOSH must make with regard to potential abatement methods. Each will be discussed separately.

(2) Technical Feasibility. Technical feasibility is the existence of technical know-how as to materials and methods available or adaptable to specific circumstances which can be applied to cited violations with a reasonable possibility that employee exposure to occupational hazards will be reduced.

(a) Sources which can provide information useful in making this determination are the following:

1 Similar situations observed elsewhere where adequate engineering controls do, in fact, reduce employee exposure.

2 Written source materials or conference presentations that indicate that equipment and designs are available to reduce employee exposure in similar situations.

3 Studies by a qualified consulting firm, professional engineer, industrial hygienist, or insurance carrier that show engineering controls are technically feasible.

4 Equipment catalogs and suppliers that indicate engineering controls are technically feasible and are available.

(b) MOSH's experience indicates that feasible engineering or administrative controls exist for most hazardous exposures.

(c) A determination that engineering or administrative controls are not feasible shall not be made without consultation with the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative.

(3) Economic Feasibility. Economic feasibility means that the employer is financially able to undertake the measures necessary to abate the citations received. The CO/IH shall inform the employer that, although the cost of corrective measures to be taken will generally not be considered as a factor in the issuance of a citation, it will be considered during an informal conference or during settlement negotiations.

e. Reducing Employee Exposure. Wherever feasible, engineering, administrative or work practice controls can be instituted even though they are not sufficient to reduce exposure to or below the permissible exposure level (PEL), nonetheless, they may be required in conjunction with personal protective equipment to reduce exposure to the lowest practical level.

7. Long-term Abatement Date for Implementation of Feasible Engineering Controls. Situations may arise where it will be difficult to set a specific abatement date when the citation is originally issued, such as where an employer chooses to implement feasible engineering controls and there is uncertainty as to when the necessary equipment may be available. The CO/IH shall discuss the problem with the employer at the closing conference and, in appropriate cases, shall encourage the employer to seek an informal conference with the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative to discuss when further information will be available.

a. Final Abatement Date. The CO/IH, and MOSH Supervisor shall make the best judgment possible as to a reasonable abatement date. A specific date for final abatement shall, in all cases, be included in the citation. The employer shall not be permitted to propose an abatement plan setting his own abatement dates. If necessary, an appropriate petition to modify the abatement date may be submitted later by the employer to the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative.

b. Employer Abatement Plan.

(1) If the employer wishes to submit an abatement plan for consideration by the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative in setting the citation abatement date:

(a) This fact shall be noted in the file,

(b) The issuance of the citation may be delayed for a brief period, and

(c) The citations must still be issued with "reasonable promptness" within the meaning of Section 5-212 of the Act.

(2) If it appears that the citation might be delayed beyond 6 months from the date of alleged violation, the citation shall be issued prior to full consideration of the plan; but the employer shall be given the opportunity to provide as much input as practicable in the setting of the abatement period.

(3) Whether or not a plan is submitted before issuing a citation, an abatement plan submission may be provided for in the citation in addition to a final abatement date.

(4) When the plan is submitted, if the engineering or administrative corrections proposed by the employer appear to be all that are feasible based on the current technology, this fact may be stipulated and agreed to between MOSH and the employer.

(a) Such an agreement shall permit assurances in advance to the employer that the establishment will be in compliance where the provisions of the plan are fully implemented.

(b) It shall be made clear in the agreement that the employer is not relieved from instituting further engineering or administrative controls as they become technically feasible, if it is likely that such further controls will lower employee exposure when exposure without personal protective equipment remains over the PEL.

(c) In all situations where an agreement is proposed, the advice of the Office of the Attorney General shall be sought on the legal implications.

(d) If an agreement is acceptable, an Assistant Attorney General shall be requested to draft the agreement.

8. Multi-step Abatement. The question of writing citations with multi-step abatement periods will normally arise only in those situations in which ultimate abatement will require the implementation of feasible engineering methods, as distinguished from feasible administrative methods or the use of personal protective equipment. Multi-step abatements shall be based on the conditions cited and the feasibility considerations.

a. General. A step-by-step program for abatement provides a tool for the CO/IH to monitor abatement progress after a citation has been issued, for the employer to make abatement decisions and to set up schedules efficiently concerning the corrective actions, and for the employee to understand the changes being made to the working environment.

(1) Where a violation of the noise setting or an air contaminant standard has been cited, the employer has the option of abating by feasible engineering and/or administrative controls. In rare cases, as discussed below, abatement may be accomplished through the use of personal protective equipment.

(2) The procedures discussed below may have applicability to the setting of multi-step abatement periods. The employer's option to use feasible engineering and/or administrative controls must be kept in mind when determining an appropriate abatement period.

b. Interim and Long-Range Abatement. It will often be found that the cited employer has no effective personal protection program and, consequently, in addition to long-term abatement through the use of feasible administrative or engineering controls, proper abatement will include a short-term requirement that appropriate personal protective equipment be provided.

(1) The Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative, in issuing the citation, shall set a short-range abatement date for the employer to give prompt temporary protection to employees pending formulation and implementation of long-range feasible engineering and/or administrative controls. Short-range administrative controls and personal protective equipment shall be specified in the citation as the interim protection. For example, the abatement column of the citation might read, "Appropriate personal protective equipment shall be issued to all affected employees by (specify a date approximately 5 days from the estimated date of receipt of the citation). Final responsibility to ensure the use of the protective equipment rests with the employer."

(2) If it has been determined that the employer will use engineering controls to achieve abatement, a specific date shall be set by which the employer can reasonably be expected to implement engineering controls including enough time for the development of engineering plans and designs for such controls, as well as necessary construction or installation time.

(3) If at a later time it is found that the final abatement date cannot be met, the employer may file with the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative an appropriate petition for modification of abatement date.

c. Considerations. In providing for multi-step abatement the following factors shall be taken into consideration:

(1) It is MOSH's position that, in general, engineering controls afford the best protection to employees, and the employer should be encouraged to utilize such controls in all instances to the extent feasible. Administrative controls are the next best alternative to engineering controls as a long-range abatement solution. The noise and air contaminant standards require the use, at the employer's option, of either engineering or administrative controls if such controls are feasible. If there are no feasible administrative controls or if the employer chooses not to use them, feasible engineering controls must be used.

NOTE: Employee rotation is an administrative control that MOSH prohibits as a method of complying with the permissible exposure limits of carcinogens.

(2) When an employer asserts that an unbearable economic burden would result from implementation of engineering or administrative controls, the employer shall present evidence in support thereof to the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative by way of an informal conference or settlement negotiation.

(3) MOSH may decide not to require engineering controls for abatement but to allow the use of PPE to abate the violation, at least until such time as engineering controls become a less significant burden for the company when the following conditions are met:

(a) If significant reconstruction of a single establishment involving a capital expenditure which would seriously jeopardize the financial condition of the company is the only method whereby the employer could achieve effective engineering controls;

(b) If there are no feasible administrative or work practice controls; and

(c) If adequate personal protective equipment or devices are available.

(4) Proper evaluation of the economic feasibility of engineering or administrative controls does not require the MOSH Supervisor to understand all available economic information before deciding that the issue of potential economic infeasibility is involved. It is sufficient that the employer produce evidence of economic hardship adequate to convince the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative that abatement by such controls would involve considerable financial difficulty.

(5) Whenever an employer complains that an unbearable economic burden would result from implementation of engineering or administrative controls, the MOSH Supervisor shall request evidence from the employer.

(a) Such evidence shall address the reasonableness of the estimated costs of engineering or administrative controls, including installation, maintenance, and lost productivity, whenever applicable, as well as the progress of the employer compared to that of the industry in installing such controls.

(b) The relative costs of engineering or administrative controls versus PPE may also be provided. Such comparisons shall take replacement costs into account.

(6) The Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative shall determine whether engineering controls are economically infeasible.

(7) In those limited situations where there are no feasible engineering or administrative controls, full abatement can be allowed by PPE.

9. Petitions for Modification of Abatement Date (PMA). COMAR 09.12.20.20 governs the disposition of petitions for modification of abatement (PMAs). If the employer requests additional time after the 15 working day contest period has passed, the following procedures for PMAs are to be observed:

a. Filing Date. A PMA shall be filed with the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative no later than the close of the next working day following the date on which abatement was originally required. A late petition shall be accompanied by the employer's statement of exceptional circumstances explaining the delay.

b. Requirements for a PMA. If a letter is received from an employer requesting a modification of abatement, the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative shall determine that all of the following requirements are set forth in detail in the employer's petition:

(1) The actions the employer has taken in an effort to achieve compliance during the prescribed abatement period and the date of each action;

(2) The specific additional abatement time necessary in order to achieve compliance;

(3) The reason the additional time is necessary, including the:

(a) Unavailability of professional or technical personnel, or materials and equipment; or

(b) Inability to complete, by the original abatement date, necessary construction or alteration of facilities;

(4) The available interim steps being taken to safeguard the employees against the cited hazard during the abatement period;

(5) A certification that a copy of the PMA has been:

(a) Posted; and

(b) If appropriate, served on the authorized representative of affected employees; and

(6) A certification of the date upon which the petition was posted and service was made.

c. Failure to Meet All Requirements. If the employer's letter does not meet all the above requirements, a letter spelling out these requirements and identifying the missing elements shall be sent to the employer within 5 working days, specifying a reasonable amount of time for the employer to return the completed PMA. If no response is received or if the information returned is still insufficient, a second attempt shall be made by telephone. The employer shall be informed of the consequences of a failure to respond adequately; namely, that the PMA may not be granted and that upon follow-up inspection the employer may, consequently, be found in violation for failure to correct.

d. Abatement Efforts. The Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative shall take the steps necessary to ensure that the employer is making a good faith attempt to bring about abatement as expeditiously as possible.

(1) Where engineering controls have been cited or required for abatement, as a service to the employer, a monitoring inspection normally shall be scheduled to evaluate the employer's abatement efforts and to provide any technical assistance.

(2) Where no engineering controls have been cited but more time is needed for other reasons not requiring assistance from MOSH, such as delays in receiving equipment, a monitoring visit shall not normally be scheduled.

(3) If a monitoring inspection is to be conducted, it shall be scheduled as soon as possible after the initial contact with the employer and shall not be delayed until the actual receipt of the PMA.

(4) The CO/IH shall decide whether sampling is necessary and, if so, to what extent (i.e., spot sampling, short-term sampling, or full-shift sampling).

(5) The CO/IH shall include pertinent findings relative to the inspection in the narrative along with the recommendations for action. To reach a valid conclusion when recommending action, it is important to have all the relevant factors available in an organized manner. The following factors shall be considered:

(a) Progress reports indicating the employer's good faith, effective use of technical expertise and/or management skills, accuracy of the information, and timeliness of progress reports.

(b) The employer's assessment of the hazards by surveys performed by in-house personnel, consultants and/or the employer's insurance agency.

(c) Documentation collected including verification of progress reports, successes and/or failures, and an assessment of current exposure of the employees.

(d) Employer and employee interviews.

(e) Specific reasons for requesting additional time including specific plans for controlling exposure and specific calendar dates.

(f) Personal protective equipment.

(g) Medical programs.

(h) Emergency action plans.

NOTE: Not all these factors will be pertinent in every PMA review. Neither are all the factors which must be considered in every case listed.

e. MOSH's Position on the PMA. Within 15 working days following the receipt of a PMA meeting the legal requirements:

(1)  The Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative shall confirm receipt to the requesting party, indicating the status and pending approval.

(2)  The Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative shall determine MOSH's position relevant to the request and notify the employer and the employee representative by letter.

(a) If an employee or employer representative objects to extension of the abatement date:

1 All relevant documentation shall be sent to the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative. Confirmation of this action shall be sent to the objecting party as soon as it is accomplished.

2 Notification of the employee objection shall be sent to the employer on the same day that the case file is forwarded to the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative.

(b) If the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative opposes the PMA both the employer and the employee representatives shall be notified of the objection by letter. The letter shall be issued on the same date of the objection by the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative.

f. Employee Objections. Affected employees or their representatives may file an objection to an employer's PMA, in writing, with the Assistant Commissioner/Authorized Representative, within 10 working days of the date of posting of the PMA by the employer or its service upon an authorized employee representative. Failure to file such written objection within the 10 working day period constitutes a waiver of any further right to object to the PMA.

Continued

 
Return to top of page