OSHA Inspection: THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MEDICAL CENTER

Issued

Mar 12, 2013

Abate by

Apr 5, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(b) (1): A Log of all recordable work-related injuries and illnesses (OSHA Form 300 or equivalent), was not completed in detail as required by the regulation:    a) On or about February 6, 2013, at the above located workplace, the employer's OSHA 300 forms for 2012 and 2013 were not completed in detail as required by 1904.4 through 1904.12. In that:    i) For the period of October 15, 2012 through December 31, 2012, at the above located workplace, the 2012 OSHA 300 log of recordable injuries and illnesses did not include where the event occurred as required by column E or the object/substance that directly injured or made the person ill as required by column F.    ii) The 2013 OSHA 300 list of recordable injuries and illnesses did not include where the event occurred as required by column E or the object/substance that directly injured or made the person ill as required by column F.

Issued

Mar 12, 2013

Abate by

Apr 5, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1904.29(b)(2): An Incident Report (OSHA 301 or equivalent) for each work related injury or illness was not completed in detail as required by the regulation:    a) On or about February 6, 2013, at the above located workplace, the employer's OSHA 301 forms for 2012 were not completed in detail as required by 1904.4 through 1904.12. In that:    i. The employer did not have complete OSHA 301s or equivalent forms for (9) work related needlestick injuries or cuts from sharp objects that were contaminated with another person's blood or other potentially infectious material that occurred between November 1, 2013 and December 30, 2013.

Issued

Mar 12, 2013

Abate by

Apr 5, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(f)(3)(i):  The postexposure evaluation and followup of an exposure incident did not include documentation of the route(s) of exposure or the circumstances under which the exposure incident occurred:    a) During the period of October 15, 2012 through February 6, 2013, at the above located workplace, employees experienced sharps injuries and other types of exposure incidents. The employer's post-exposure investigations did not include sufficient documentation concerning the circumstances surrounding the exposure incidents. The investigation did not include:     a) The engineering controls in use at the time,   b) The work practices followed,   c)  A description of the device in use,   d) The protective equipment or clothing that was used at the time of the exposure incident,   e) The location, procedure being performed when the incident occurred, and   f)  The employee's training.

Issued

Mar 12, 2013

Abate by

Apr 5, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(f)(5):  The employer did not obtain or provide the employee with a copy of the evaluating health care professional's written opinion within 15 days of the completion of the evaluation:    a) During the period of October 15, 2012 through February 6, 2013, at the above located workplace, employees experienced sharps injuries and other types of exposure incidents. The employer did not have and did not provide employees a copy of the post-exposure health care professional's written opinions as required by 29 CFR 1910.1030(f)(5).

Issued

Mar 12, 2013

Abate by

Apr 5, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1030(h)(5)(i):  The employer did not establish and maintain a sharps injury log for the recording of percutaneous injurers from contaminated sharps. The information in the sharps injury log was not maintained in such a manner as to protect the confidentiality of the injured employee. The sharps injury log did not contain at a minimum:     A) The type and brand of device involved in the incident.  B) The department or work area where the exposure occurred, and  C) An explanation of how the incident occurred:        a) During the period of October 15, 2012 though February 6, 2013, at the above located workplace, employees experienced sharps injuries. The employer's sharps injury log included the employee's name but did not include the type and brand of device. The lack of information about the type and brand of needle involved in the incident prevented a determination of the effectiveness of the needle's safety features.