Leaders of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health got a four-hour grilling by state legislators in the wake of a critical state audit. The fire is still hot. Click here to read about it…

DIR’s Director is leaving, and you may be a surprised to learn where she’s going and what she’ll be doing. Click here for the whole story.

It’s taken 10 years, to change confined space regulations. Why so long and what do the changes look like? Click here to find out.

As California's bird flu crisis appears to be subsiding, a worker organization is seeking additional protections for workers. A Cal/OSHA advisory committee has been authorized to study whether they are necessary.

California’s residential construction industry is frustrated with the rules the Federal government has forced California to adopt. The Cal/OSHA Standards Board has now agreed to continue discussing some key issues. Premium subscribers can click here to learn exactly what’s happening.

OSHA is about to get a new boss. Who is he, what is his background, and what is his vision for OSHA? How will it affect California? Click here – we have the answers.

Valero’s Wilmington Refinery was the first such facility to certify for Cal/OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Programs. Now, after a hiatus, it is working toward Star status again, and the road to that achievement is paved by an achievement by its nearby asphalt plant.

Here are the safety-related bills to make it to the governor's this legislative season.

Among the most recent settlements of Cal/OSHA cases are several fatality cases and an injury case worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. See how these cases were resolved by clicking here.

Here are the latest fatal California workplace incidents from the first week in September.

49 COR 40-8975 [¶23,356]

PROTECTION FROM REINFORCING STEEL AND SIMILAR PROJECTIONS –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §1712(c)(1) –
The evidence proffered established that Employer failed to cap metal forming stakes which caused an impalement hazard.

MULTI-EMPLOYER WORKSITES – CONTROLLING EMPLOYER
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §336.10 –
The proffered evidence established Employer was correctly cited as a controlling employer.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – DUE DILIGENCE –
The proffered evidence established Employer failed to meet its burden to establish that it exercised due diligence to relieve it of liability for the violation.

SERIOUS CLASSIFICATION AND REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION –
Labor Code §6432 (c) –
Citation 1 was properly classified as Serious.  Employer did not rebut the presumption.

ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES –
Citation 1 was affirmed, and the proposed penalty was assessed.

Digest of COSHAB ALJ’s Decision dated August 1, 2025, Inspection No. 1606843 (Visalia)

49 COR 40-8969 [¶23,354]

SERIOUS INJURY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §342(a) –
The evidence proffered established that Employer failed to timely report the serious injury.  The penalty was adjusted by the ALJ.

CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY DURING CLEANING OPERATIONS –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §3314(c) –
The Division established that Employer failed to stop and de-energize or disengage machinery or equipment capable of movement, during cleaning, servicing and adjusting operations.

 MOTION TO AMEND CITATION –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §371.2 –
Amendment of a citation is permitted so long as the opposing party has an opportunity to demonstrate any prejudice.  Here, the ALJ determined the citation amendment was proper.

SERIOUS CLASSIFICATION, ACCIDENT-RELATED AND REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION –
Labor Code §6432 (c) –
Citation 2 was properly classified as Serious Accident-Related as there was a causal nexus between the violation and the serious injury.  Employer did not rebut the presumption.

 ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES –
Citation 1, Item 1, was affirmed and the penalty was adjusted. Citation 2 was affirmed with the proposed penalty deemed reasonable.

Digest of COSHAB ALJ’s Decision dated July 30, 2025,  Inspection No. 1458699 (Hawthorne)

 

49 COR 40-8972 [¶23,355]

CLEAR WALKWAYS OR AISLES –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §3272(b) –
The Division did not establish that the walkways were less than 24 inches wide by a preponderance of the evidence.

 OPERATION OF INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §3328(g) –
The Division established that Employer failed to maintain equipment (guillotine doors in kennels) in a safe operating condition.

 ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES –
Citation 1, Item 1 was vacated and Citation 1, Item 2 was affirmed with the proposed penalty deemed reasonable.

Digest of COSHAB ALJ’s Decision dated July 31, 2025, Inspection No. 1654479 (Los Angeles)

 

49 COR 40-8965 [¶23,352R]

APPEAL – LATE FILING –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §359 –
The Appeals Board affirmed the ALJ’s Order granting a late appeal, finding that the Employer showed good cause for the delay in filing the appeal.

Digest of COSHAB’s Denial of Petition for Reconsideration dated July 28, 2025, Inspection No. 1764053.

49 COR 40-8966 [¶23,353R]

 INJURY AND ILLNESS PREVENTION PROGRAM (IIPP) –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §3203(a)/1509(a)
The Appeals Board found that Employer failed to effectively implement its IIPP in conformance with manufacturer’s safety instructions.

 OPERATION OF MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §3314(c)
The Appeals Board found that Employer was involved in cleaning or adjusting the drill rig which was not stopped or de-energized or mechanically blocked to prevent inadvertent movement.

 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES –
Independent Employee Action Defense (IEAD) –
Employer failed to meet all five elements of IEAD regarding Citation 3 by a preponderance of the evidence.

Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §3314(c)(1) –
Employer failed to establish the applicability of the minor servicing exception.

Digest of COSHAB’s Decision After Reconsideration dated August 7, 2025, Inspection No. 1420923.

49 COR 40-8961 [¶23,349]

PNEUMATICALLY DRIVEN NAILERS – OPERATED PER MANUFACTURER’S INSTRUCTIONS –
Title 8, Cal. Code of Regulations, §1704(b)(2)
The Division failed to show Employer did not ensure that an employee operated a nailer in accordance with the manufacturer’s operating and safety instructions. Citation 1 was vacated.

 SAFEGUARD AGAINST FALLING OBJECTS –
Title 8, Cal. Code of Regulations, §3273(e)(1)
Evidence proffered showed Employer did not employ any of the methods contemplated in the safety order to safeguard against employee exposure below an elevated work area.

 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES – LOGICAL TIME DEFENSE –
Employer failed to show that implementing the safeguards in the safety order would expose an employee to a greater danger than non-compliance.

 SERIOUS CLASSIFICATION, ACCIDENT-RELATED AND REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION –
Labor Code §6432(a) and (c)
Citation 2 – The causal nexus between the Serious violation and the injury was sufficient to sustain the Accident-Related classification.Employer did not rebut the presumption.

 ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES –
Citation 1 was vacated by the ALJ. Citation 2 was affirmed and the classification was correct. The ALJ determined it was appropriate to give Employer maximum credit in calculating the penalty.

Digest of COSHAB ALJ’s Decision dated July 16, 2025, Inspection No 1321130 (Berkeley)

 

 

49 COR 40-8963 [¶23,350R]

JURISDICTION – PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §6614(a) –
The Board lacked jurisdiction to grant Employer’s untimely petition for reconsideration.

Digest of COSHAB’s Denial of Petition for Reconsideration dated July 25, 2025, Inspection No. 1748579.

49 COR 40-8964 [¶23,351R]

JURISDICTION – PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION –
Title 8, California Code of Regulations, §6614(a) –
The Board lacked jurisdiction to grant Employer’s untimely petition for reconsideration.

Digest of COSHAB’s Denial of Petition for Reconsideration dated July 25, 2025, Inspection No. 1730290.