Repeat violations

If all data from a process he within the 3o limits, then we conclude that nothing unusual has happened during the recorded time period. The process environment is relatively unchanged, and the product quahty lies within specification. On the other hand, if repeated violations of the 3o limits occur, then the process environment has changed and the process is out of control. 

Sale of a deficient or misbranded economic poison is a violation of law, for which the seller is subject to prosecution as a misdemeanor. The maximum penalty is a fine of 500 or 6 months in jail. Repeated violations are cause for revocation of registration. This is a very drastic penalty and is seldom required. 

No harm is done when the electrolyte is allowed to solidify in the generator but when it is again melted, the burners should be allowed to melt the top part of the solid before the bottom is heated. Repeated violation of this precaution might rupture the apparatus, because the density of the solid is greater than that of the liquid. A circular gas burner which directs flames inwardly may be adjusted to heat the cell in the desired manner. No heating is necessary while electrolysis is in progress, unless a small current is used. 

Ian Sutton stated, Some companies choose to challenge citations, even when the fine is small. He indicated that up to 80 percent of the citations that were challenged were rejected on the grounds that there were errors that invalidated the citation. He suggests another reason to contest a citation which has a modest fine of say 5,000, is that in the unlikely event of a second citation, the second fine may be escalated to 50,000 as a repeat violation. [26]... 

Believe me when I say I have tried. The DBA does not like to talk. And even when I got someone on the line they played so ignorant (was it an act ) as to predispose incompetency. Not one person knew a thing about these sassafras oil threshold limits. Even the guys in the Diversion Control whose job it is to know such things could not answer my simple questions. What this is, folks, is another example of the DEA s repeated violation of the Freedom of Information Act. For years the FLA has forced all branches of government to disclose their policies to the public. The DEA has not done so. 

The Norwegian Medicines Agency (NMA) monitors advertising and other marketing activities of the pharmaceutical industry and may impose bans on specific marketing activities or, in the event of repeated violation of the law, ban all advertising for a specific pharmaceutical product. 

In contrast to 7, 17 does not require a chemical to pose an imminent hazard before 17 can be applied. EPA has stated that it will not seek 17 s broad remedies unless it is apparent that monetary penalties will not compel compliance. For example, it will seek to enjoin a violation or seize a chemical in cases involving outright refusal to comply or a history of repeat violations. ... 

No legally enforceable measures taken to ensure that concerns identified in inspections are addressed. Weak response to repeated violations uncovered in periodic inspections. 

Since it can be difficult for OSHA to know whether an employer was dehberately ignoring a standard, or simply made an honest mistake, repeat violations of the same standard for which citations had already been issued is a strong indicator of a willful action (Vincoli, 1997). 

A repeat violation is one that occurs more than once and that is noted on two separate inspections. OSHA s definition is as follows ... 

Repeat violations are those in which an employer has previously been cited within the last three years for the same, or a substantially similar, violation and which has become a final order and not under contest. 

The contracting company should not have a record of willful or repeat violations. 

An OSHA citation informs the employer of OSHA violations. Penalties are fines assessed as the result of citations. In March 1991, civil monetary penalties were increased sevenfold. The maximum allowable penalty is 70,000 for each willful or repeated violation, and 7,000 for each serious or other-than serious violation as well as 7,000 per day beyond a stated abatement date for failure to correct a violation. Examples of very large penalties paid out are ... 

Repeat violations are violations of any standard, regulation, rule, or order where, upon reinspection, a substantially similar violation is found. Repeat violations can bring a fine of up to 70,000 for each such violation. 

OSHA compliance officers can enter workplaces at reasonable times where work is taking place, inspect condition, facility machine, equipment, or materials, and question in private an employee or other person formally associated with the company. OSHA is empowered to issue citations and/or set penalties. Citations are issued for (a) other than serious violations, (b) willful violations, (c) repeat violations, and (d) failure to correct prior violations. 

Although currently in committee, safety professionals should be aware of the Protecting America s Workers Act of 2009 (PAWA), which proposes to substantially raise the civil and criminal penalties. As proposed, PAWA would increase the civil penalty for a willful or repeat OSHA violation to a minimum fine of 8,000 and a maximum fine of 120,000. Minimum and maximum fines for willful or repeat violations causing a fatality would increase to a 50,000 minimum and a 250,000 maximum. Serious violations would increase from 7,000 to 12,000, with a maximum of 50,000 if a fatality is involved. On the criminal side, the maximum penalty would be increased to a felony and a 10-year prison term. 

A fatality/catastrophe inspection in which OSHA finds one or more willful or repeated violations or failure-to-abate notices based on a serious violation related to a death of an employee or three or more hospitalizations. 

C. Non-Fatality/Catastrophe Criterion for Hazards Due to the Potential Release of a Highly Hazardous Chemical (Process Safety Management). An inspection in which OSHA finds three or more willful or repeated violations or failure-to-abate notices (or any combination of these violations/notices), based on high gravity serious violations related to hazards due to the potential release of a highly hazardous chemical, as defined in the PSM standard. 

A carrier is also subject to the suspension and revocation provisions in 49 U.S.C. 13905 for repeated violations. 

The focused on- and oflF-site investigations involving the auditor only checking compliance in the regulatory areas that the CSA compliance tracking system (the CSA Safety Measurement System or SMS) has shown the carrier has had repeated violations in. An example would be a carrier that has a high... 

Policies dealing with repeat violations, citations, or crashes, which include termination. 

The chronic or persistent violator is the individual who repeatedly violates established statutes and ordinances as in the case of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, or in the case of company safety rules. 

An individual whose record, during a given time period, shows reports of repeated violations of laws or regulations. In traffic safety, a habitual violator is usually any driver whose record during a consecutive 12-month period shows reports of more than three convictions for traffic violations or more than five times the average number of convictions for all drivers in the state, whichever is greater. See also Accident Prone Theory. 

The Act established three violation categories (1) nonserious, (2) serious, and (3) willful and repeated. The law does not require OSHA inspectors to penalize companies for nonserious violations of health and safety standards. Inspectors must, however, levy fines for serious violations, which are infractions substantially increasing the likelihood of a worker fatality or serious injury, and to levy fines for willful and repeated violations. Under the original Act inspectors could fine firms up to 1,000 for each serious violation of health and safety standards, 10,000 for each willful violation, and 1,000 per day for each repeated violation. In 1990 Congress increased maximum fines to 7,000 for serious violations and increased maximum fines to 70,000 for willful and repeated violations. The Occupational Safety and Health Act established criminal penalties only in situations where willful violations result in worker deaths. ... 

After the compliance officer reports the findings, the area director determines which citations warrant formal issuance and which penalties require assessment. An other than serious violation addresses issues that would not normally cause death or serious physical harm. OSHA can issue a serious violation if substantial probability exist that death or serious physical harm could result. The employer knew or should have known situation or hazard. OSHA cites imminent dangerous citations as serious violations. A willful violation refers to a situation that the employer intentionally and knowingly committed. The employer either knows that the operation constitutes a violation or is aware that a hazardous condition existed but made no reasonable effort to eliminate it. A repeat violation can address any standard, regulation, rule, or order where, upon reinspection, another... 

The company is being cited with 11 repeat violations with proposed penalties of 131,200. The violations include ... 

October 9, 2014, Cincinnati, OH. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued a citation to Kloeckner Metals Corp. for failure to guard an in-running nip point on a machine with rollers that moved materials into the machine. On April 22, 2014, a worker got caught in the machine action and suffered severe injuries. The citation included a repeat violation because the company had received a similar citation the previous year. The citation included penalties of 56,000. ... 

March 17, 2014, Columbus, OH. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued approximately 26 citations related to machine guarding deficiencies against the ConAgra Foods Inc. flour mill in Columbus, OH. The citations identify there were ten serious violations, which have a substantial probability of death or serious harm to workers. Some violations were repeat violations, including similar violations in other ConAgra food plants. In the case, OSHA issued 117,000 in fines. ... 

Two points are deduced for each serious deviation from standards that could result in one disabling injury or significant property damage or repeat violation from previous inspection. 

Repeat violation citations are issued when the original violation has been abated, but upon reinspection, another violation of the previously cited section of a standard is noted. They may be inadvertent, but if they are found to be willful, both a willful and a repeat citation may be issued. For a first repeat violation, penalties assessed are multiplied by a factor of 2 for employers with less than 251 employees and by 5 for larger employers. The multiplier goes to 5 for a second repeat offense for small employers and 10 for large. OSHA regional administrators have the authority to use a multiplication factor of up to 10 for small employers in order to achieve the necessary deterrent effect. Failure to abate within the prescribed period can result in a penalty for each day of the violation beyond the abatement date. 

---