by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
FLEXO Magazine : March 2008
TARGETING AND SELECTION OSHA used two primary sources of data for its analysis and included the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data on the actual number of amputations as well as their own internal database of inspections. To be targeted, the selected industry would need to meet two criteria: High IMIS violations coupled with High BLS Amputation Numbers High IMIS violations coupled with High BLS Amputation Rates IMIS is OSHA's Integrated Management Information System, an agency database for enforcement data. The revised targeting methodology also included two additional standards, recognized as being related to amputation hazards. The standards are 29 CFR 1910.147, The Control of Hazardous Energy (Lockout/ Tagout) and 29 CFR 1910.219, Mechanical Power-Transmission Apparatus. Lockout/Tagout ensures proper de-energization and re-energization of equipment during servicing and maintenance. The Power Transmission rule addresses adequate guarding of equipment and conveyors. HOW THE INDUSTRY LOOKS OSHA's analysis identified industry segments by SIC (Standard Industry Classification) Code and specific equipment. As a re- sult, the printing industry as a whole, was identified specifically through SIC Codes and through Appendix D of the revised di- rective which lists "printing presses" as "typical machinery and equipment associated with amputations". To take a proactive effort in response to OSHA's NEP and data analysis, Flexographic Technical Association (FTA) has been working with the Printing Industries of America /Graphic Arts Technical Foundation (PIA/GATF), which convened a committee of experienced industry representatives to evaluate amputation hazard risk in the printing industry. The first task the committee undertook revolved around how OSHA's data for the industry compared with the industry's general perceptions of amputation hazards in printing facilities. The committee concluded that there were general perceptions regarding certain press and postpress equipment that presented potential amputation risks, but there was a need to evaluate a comprehensive accident data set to determine risk priority for future outreach. Using BLS and OSHA accident data collated for the printing industry during the past five years, the committee found some interesting and useful facts. There were 190 documented cases of fatalities, crushing, amputation, or other significant injury re- ported for the printing industry during this period. (It should be noted that this accident data set represents only agency inves- tigated injuries or fatalities as opposed to all injuries recorded on OSHA logs that may have occurred in the industry during the five-year period.) Those documented cases are summarized