AGENCY
INSTRUCTION
MIOSHA
Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Department of Labor and Economic Growth
DOCUMENT IDENTIFIER:
DATE:
MIOSHA-COM-11-1
January 24, 2011
SUBJECT: Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
ABSTRACT
I.
Purpose:
This instruction establishes guidelines for cross-citing hazards of
another Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(MIOSHA) program focus (e.g., safety citing health rules or vice
versa; construction citing general industry rules or vice versa).
II.
Scope:
This instruction applies to the Construction Safety and Health
Division (CSHD) and the General Industry Safety and Health Division
(GISHD).
III.
References:
A. Michigan Public Employees (MPE) Contract, Article 33, Integrity
of the Bargaining Unit.
B. Michigan State Employees Association (MSEA) Contract, Article
52, Integrity of the Bargaining Unit.
C. MIOSHA, CSHD Division Instruction CSHD-ADM-08-1,
Completing Inspection Case Work, as amended
D. MIOSHA, GISHD Division Instruction GISHD-COM-05-3,
Joint, Intra-Office Assistance Request (IOA) and One-MIOSHA
Inspections, as amended.
IV.
Distribution:
MIOSHA Staff; OSHA Lansing Area Office; General; S-Drive
Accessible; MIOSHA Weekly; and Internet Accessible.
V.
Cancellations:
None.
VI.
Contact:
Martha B. Yoder, Deputy Director
VII.
Originator:
/Douglas J. Kalinowski/
Douglas J. Kalinowski, Director
Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
Executive Summary
The General Industry Safety and Health Division and the Construction Safety and Health
Division convened a workgroup to develop guidelines for Industrial Hygienists and Safety
Officers when alleging violations of each other’s program focus, i.e. safety citing health rules or
vice versa; or construction citing general industry rules or vice versa. This instruction includes
the policy for citing simple, common hazards and for more complex hazards, procedures for
identifying, and addressing imminent danger and fatality situations.
I.
Purpose. This instruction establishes guidelines for cross-citing hazards of another
MIOSHA program focus (e.g., safety citing health rules or vice versa; construction citing
general industry rules or vice versa).
II.
Scope. This instruction applies to the Construction Safety and Health Division (CSHD)
and the General Industry Safety and Health Division (GISHD).
III.
References.
A.
Michigan Public Employees (MPE) Contract, Article 33, Integrity of the
Bargaining Unit.
B.
Michigan State Employees Association (MSEA) Contract, Article 52, Integrity of
the Bargaining Unit.
C.
MIOSHA, CSHD Division Instruction CSHD-ADM-08-1-R, Completing
Inspection Case Work, June 3, 2008.
D.
MIOSHA, GISHD Division Instruction GISHD-COM-05-3R1, Joint, Intra-Office
Assistance Request (IOA) and One-MIOSHA Inspections, June 22, 2007.
IV.
Distribution. MIOSHA Staff; OSHA Lansing Area Office; General; S-Drive Accessible:
MIOSHA Weekly; and Internet Accessible.
V.
Cancellations. None.
VI.
Contact. Martha Yoder, Deputy Director
VII.
Originator. Douglas J. Kalinowski, Director
VIII.
Definitions:
CROSS-CITING: The practice of one discipline or division citing a rule routinely cited
by another discipline or division. Examples: General industry safety citing a general
industry health rule or vice versa. Construction safety citing a construction health rule or
vice versa. General industry citing a construction rule or vice versa.
DISCIPLINE: This term refers to the area of expertise of compliance staff. MIOSHA
includes two disciplines, occupational safety and occupational health compliance.
1
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
INTRA-OFFICE ASSISTANCE (IOA): This term applies to an inspection that is
initially opened by either a safety or health compliance officer in the same division and
the officer opening the inspection determines that assistance is needed from a compliance
officer of the other enforcement discipline. In GISHD an intra-office assistance request
can be made when the initiating (lead) compliance officer determines that a serious
hazard related to the other enforcement discipline (i.e., health/safety or safety/health)
must be evaluated. In the CSHD the assistance request is typically made by the safety or
health compliance officer contacting the other enforcement discipline directly. An intraoffice assistance request may result in a joint inspection.
JOINT INSPECTION: An inspection that is jointly conducted by a safety officer and an
industrial hygienist with the intent of covering both safety and health issues.
ONE-MIOSHA INSPECTIONS: Inspections that require participation of a compliance
officer from the GISHD and a compliance officer from CSHD.
IX.
X.
Appendices. This instruction includes guidance documents on the following hazards that
are approved for cross-citing.
A.
Appendix A - CSHD list of items for cross-citing
B.
Appendix B - GISHD list of items for cross-citing
Background. All MIOSHA activity must focus on meeting the overall agency goal of
helping protect the health and safety of Michigan workers. For more than twenty years,
MIOSHA has used staff in the most effective and efficient manner possible to accomplish
the program mission.
Prior to the agency consolidation under Executive Orders 1996-1, the MIOSHA program
was split in two different state departments. Safety issues were addressed by the
Department of Labor. Health issues were addressed by the Department of Public Health.
To make the best use of staff presence in the workplace, several documents were created
for collecting information relative to a violation of the other discipline. Safety officers
(SO) and industrial hygienists (IH) collected information that was provided to the sister
agency and used as the basis to issue a citation.
When the program merged into one department, guidance from the Attorney General and
the Department Executive Director indicated that properly trained MIOSHA enforcement
staff has the authority to conduct an inspection and develop the basis for the issuance of a
citation, regardless of which commission promulgated the MIOSHA standard.
Since the MIOSHA reorganization in September 2003, staff has cited hazards and
conditions in the other discipline when training and equipment has been provided.
Examples include Bloodborne Infectious Diseases in general industry, and lead and
asbestos bulk sampling in construction. The intent is that both safety and health will
identify and address less complicated issues during inspections and investigations.
2
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
MIOSHA will respect the provisions of the bargaining unit agreements with the MSEA
and the MPE Union. In no way does MIOSHA intend to diminish the expertise or
complex technical skills required to respond to most issues by staff from the specific
program areas covered by the rule or requirement.
XI.
Policy.
A.
Staff will continue to cross-cite simple, common hazards from those listed in
Appendix A for CSHD and Appendix B for GISHD during inspections and
investigations. Staff will only cross-cite hazards for which they have the
appropriate training, expertise and knowledge. This includes an understanding of
the rule, ability to apply the rule in the workplace, ability to recognize and
document hazards, and the ability to explain abatement alternatives.
B.
For more complex hazards or items not listed in Appendix A or B, staff will work
cooperatively with the other discipline or division to collect and transfer
information and to conduct a One MIOSHA or joint inspection.
C.
XII.
1.
Example: A safety officer or industrial hygienist from GISHD identifies
an unsafe trench, takes photos, calls CSHD and turns over photographic
documentation and narrative to CSHD.
2.
Example: Within a compliance division, a SO identifies a large number of
complex health hazards associated with the other discipline. The other
discipline is contacted and a decision is made to conduct a joint inspection
or an IOA.
Staff will continue to discuss the hazards of the other discipline or division with
their counterparts, especially when staff is not confident in their expertise and
when the issues are complex.
Procedures for Identifying Cross-Citable Hazards.
A.
The Division Directors and/or designees will identify which hazards are
appropriate for recommendation for routine cross-citing. Criteria for selecting
hazards include complexity of the issue, whether the issue can be easily assessed,
and how common it is to the workplace. These recommendations will be
forwarded to the workgroup for evaluation and determination for appropriate
cross-citing.
B.
The Division Directors and/or designee will develop guidance for evaluating
cross-citable hazards. Guidance may include a hazard analysis worksheet, fact
sheet, or other written guidance. Staff will be trained on the hazard and how to
use the guidance and/or worksheet.
C.
The initial set of common cross-citable hazards has been identified and guidance
is included as Appendices to this instruction.
3
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
XIII.
D.
The workgroup process will be used to assess and determine whether additional
hazards should be added to those deemed appropriate for cross-citing. The
workgroup will consist of union representatives of the disciplines that will be
impacted by the new cross-citing guidelines as well as management from the
disciplines impacted.
E.
In the event there is no steward or employee representative available in the
affected discipline, the union affected will be invited to designate a committee
member.
F.
Appropriate equipment for cross-citing will be assigned when necessary.
G.
Staff are encouraged to discuss cross-citable hazards that come up and to
determine how the hazard will be addressed; i.e., with a One-MIOSHA or Joint
Inspection, cited by the other discipline, or cross-cited. Staff is also encouraged
to discuss new cross-citable issues for consideration.
Imminent Danger and Fatality Situations.
A.
Staff flexibility in addressing imminent danger situations and meeting the one-day
requirement to initiate a fatality investigation is contractually recognized and has
historically been used by the agency to meet these emergency needs.
B.
When staff from a different discipline or division is called upon to open an
investigation due to an imminent danger or fatality, the information collected
during the opening conference and during the physical investigation will be
transferred to the staff person from the appropriate discipline or division to
include in the case file.
C.
When it is unclear whether the work operation is safety or health and/or whether it
falls under general industry or construction, compliance officers from more than
one program area may initially be assigned. Once further information is obtained
to clarify the work operations, a compliance officer will be identified to assume
responsibility for the investigation. If multiple issues remain, it will become a
One-MIOSHA, joint inspection, or an IOA; and a lead compliance officer may be
named.
4
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
Appendix A
Construction Safety and Health Division
Construction Safety Rules
GENERAL RULES, PART 1:
(1) Rule Violated: 114(1)(a)
Standard Violation: 408.40114(1)
The employer did not develop, maintain, and coordinate with employees an accident prevention
program.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/ OR LOCATION]
(2) Rule Violated: 114(1)(b)
Standard Violated: 408.40114(1)
The employer did not maintain a copy of the accident prevention program at the job site.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/ OR LOCATION]
(3) Rule Violated: 114(2)(a)
Standard Violated: 408.40114(2)
The accident prevention program did not designate the qualified employee or person who is
responsible for administering the program.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/ OR LOCATION]
(4) Rule Violated: 114(2)(b)
Standard Violated: 408.40114(2)
No instructions provided to each employee regarding the operating procedures, hazards, and
safeguards of tools and equipment when necessary to perform the job.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/OR LOCATIONS]
(5) Rule Violated: 115(2)(c)
Standard Violated: 408.40115(2)
An employee other than the operator were not prohibited to ride any piece of moving equipment
not covered by a specific standard, unless there is a seat or other safety feature provided for use
by the employee. Acceptable safety features could include a guardrail, enclosure, or a seat belt.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/OR LOCATION]
5
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
(6) Rule Violated: 119(3)
Standard Violated: 408.40119(3)
The floor of a work area or aisle was not maintained in a manner that does not create a hazard to
an employee.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/ OR LOCATION]
(7) Rule Violated: 129(1)
Standard Violated: 408.40129(1)
Toilets at construction sites were not provided for employees as follows:
(a) 1 to 20 employees – 1 toilet.
(b) 21 to 40 employees – 2 toilets.
(c) 41 or more employees – 1 additional toilet for each additional 40 or less employees.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/ OR LOCATION]
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, PART 6:
(8) Rule Violated: 622(1)
Standard Violated: 408.40622(1)
A helmet, as prescribed in R 408.40621, was not used to protect the employee where a hazard or
risk of injury exists from falling or flying objects or particles or from other harmful contacts or
exposures.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/OR LOCATION]
(9) Rule Violated: 624(1)
Standard Violated: 408.40624(1)
Face and eye protection, as prescribed in R 408.40623, was not used where a hazard or risk of
injury exists from flying objects or particles, harmful contacts, exposures such as glare, liquids,
injurious radiation, electrical flash, or a combination of these hazards. Table 1 was not used as a
guide to select the proper eye and face protection.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/OR LOCATION]
(10) Rule Violated: 624(5)
Standard Violated: 408.40624(5)
While welding and using a welding shield, a safety glass feature with a flip-up filter lens was not
incorporated or safety glasses with side shields or goggles were not worn under the shield when
the shield was raised and was exposed to flying objects.
[IDENTIFY SPECIFICS AND/OR LOCATION]
6
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
Construction Health Rules
Part 1: General Rules
Washing Facilities

Rule 130: An employer shall supply washing facilities for employees who are
engaged in the application of paint, coatings, herbicides, or insecticides or in other
operations where contaminants may be harmful to employees. The facilities shall be
in close proximity to the worksite and shall be equipped to enable employees to
remove paint, coatings, herbicides, insecticides, or other harmful contaminants.
o Typically OTS. Can be serious if highly toxic or corrosive materials are found to
be present and there is evidence of exposure. Consult IH if additional
information/clarification is needed.
o Save # 130: GENERAL RULES, PART 1, RULE 130
Part 451: Respiratory Protection

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(i)-Where Respirator Use Is Not Required: An employer
may provide respirators at the request of employees or permit employees to use their
own respirators, if the employer determines that such respirator use will not in itself
create a hazard. If the employer determines that any voluntary respirator use is
permissible, the employer must provide the respirator users with the information
contained in Appendix D to this standard (“Information for Employees Using
Respirators When Not Required Under the Standard”).
o Save # 451.1866: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451
1910.134(c)(2)(i)

29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(ii)-Where Respirator use Is Not Required: In addition, the
employer must establish and implement those elements of a written respiratory
protection program necessary to ensure that any employee using a respirator
voluntarily is medically able to use that respirator, and that the respirator is cleaned,
stored, and maintained so that its use does not present a health hazard to the user.
Exception: Employers are not required to include in a written respiratory protection
program those employees whose only use of respirators involves the voluntary use of
filtering facepieces (disposable dust masks).
o Typically OTS. Could be serious if the employee utilizing the respirator had a
serious health condition (e.g. heart or lung disease) or the respirator was stored
7
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
unprotected in area with highly toxic materials. Consult IH if additional
information/clarification is needed.
o Save # 451.1867: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451
1910.134(c)(2)(ii)
Medical Evaluations

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer shall provide a medical evaluation to
determine the employee’s ability to use a respirator, before the employee is fit tested
or required to use the respirator in the workplace. The employer may discontinue an
employee’s medical evaluations when the employee is no longer required to use a
respirator. (Note, if employee is using a cartridge type respirator voluntarily or
required to wear any type of respiratory protection, medical evaluation is required).
o Typically OTS. Could be serious if the employee utilizing the respirator had a
known serious health condition (e.g. heart or lung disease). Consult IH if
additional information/clarification is needed.
o Save # 451.1869: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451 1910.134(e)(1)
Respirator Fit Testing
Before an employee may be required to use any respirator with a negative or positive
pressure tight fitting facepiece, the employer must be fit tested with the same make, model,
style and size respirator that will be used.

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer shall ensure that employees using a tightfitting facepiece respirator pass an appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or
quantitative fit test (QNFT) as stated in this paragraph.
o Save # 451.1870: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451 1910.134(f)(1)

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): The employer shall ensure that an employee using a tightfitting facepiece respirator is fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever
a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least
annually thereafter.
o Save # 451.1870: RESPIRATORY PROTECTON, PART 451, 1910.134(f)(2)
o Often OTS. Can be serious if over exposures to toxic materials likely. Consult
IH if additional information/clarification is needed.
Respirator Use and Facepiece Seal Protection
Note, these sections apply when tight fitting respirators are required. The employer shall not
permit respirators with tight fitting facepieces to be worn by employees who have:
8
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Facial hair that comes between the sealing surface of
the facepiece and the face or that interferes with valve function.
o Often OTS. Can be serious if over exposures to toxic materials is likely. Consult
IH if additional information/clarification is needed.
o Save # 451.1870.2: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451
1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A)
Respirator Storage
The employer shall ensure respirators are stored as follows:

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(2)(i): All respirators shall be stored to protect them from
damage, contamination, dust, sunlight, extreme temperatures, excessive moisture, and
damaging chemicals, and they shall be packed or stored to prevent deformation of the
facepiece and exhalation valve.
o Typically OTS. Can be serious if the respirator could pose a significant, potential
health risk to the wearer (ex: the respirator is improperly stored in areas where
lead or asbestos abatement work is taking place). Consult IH if additional
information/clarification is needed.
o Save # 451.1870.02: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451
1910.134(h)(2)(i)
Emergency Respirator Inspection

29 CFR 1910.134(h)(3)(i)(B): All respirators maintained for use in emergency
situations shall be inspected at least monthly and in accordance with the
manufacturer’s recommendations, and shall be checked for proper function before
and after each use.
o Typically serious. Consult IH if additional information/clarification is needed.
o Save # 451.1870.02.F: RESPIRATORY PROTECTION, PART 451
1910.134(h)(3)(i)(B)
Part 602: Asbestos
Building Survey and Communication of Hazards to Contractors
This standard applies to the communication of information concerning asbestos hazards
in construction activities to facilitate compliance with this standard. Most asbestosrelated construction activities involve previously installed building materials. Building
9
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
owners often are the only and/or best sources of information concerning them.
Therefore, they, along with employers of potentially exposed employees, are assigned
specific information conveying and retention duties under this standard. Installed
Asbestos Containing Building Material - employers and building owners shall identify
thermal system insulation (TSI) and sprayed or troweled on surfacing materials in
buildings as asbestos-containing in pre-1981 buildings, unless they determine in
compliance with paragraph (k)(5) of this standard that the material is not asbestoscontaining. Asphalt and vinyl flooring material installed prior to1981 must also be
considered as asbestos containing unless the employer, pursuant to paragraph (g)(8)(i)(I)
of this standard determines that it is not asbestos-containing. If the employer/building
owner has actual knowledge, or should have known through the exercise of due
diligence, that other materials are asbestos-containing, they too must be treated as such.
When communicating information to employees pursuant to this standard, owners and
employers shall identify presumed asbestos containing materials (PACM) as asbestos
containing materials (ACM). Additional requirements relating to communication of
asbestos work on multi-employer worksites are set out in paragraph (d) of this standard.

29 CFR 1926.1101(k)(2)(i): Before work subject to this standard is begun,
building and facility owners shall determine the presence, location and quantity of
ACM, and/or PACM at the work site pursuant to paragraph (k)(1) of this section.
o Typically Serious: Due to the hazards associated with asbestos, this
citation is normally serious when improperly controlled asbestos
disturbance or removal activities have occurred in the building. A referral
to an IH would be necessary in this situation for a follow-up. However, if
a disturbance has not and is not likely to occur, an other than serious
citation may be issued.
o Save # 602.8010.9 : ASBESTOS STANDARDS FOR
CONSTRUCTION, PART 602, 1926.1101(k)(2)(i)

29 CFR 1926.1101(k)(2)(ii): Building and/or facility owners shall notify the
following persons of the presence, location and quantity of ACM or PACM, at the
work sites in their buildings and facilities. Notification either shall be in writing,
or shall consist of a personal communication between the owner and the person to
whom notification must be given or their authorized representatives:
(A) Prospective employers applying or bidding for work whose employees
reasonably can be expected to work in or adjacent to areas containing such
material;
(B) Employees of the owner who will work in or adjacent to areas containing
such material;
(C) On multi-employer worksites, all employers of employees who will be
performing work within or adjacent to areas containing such materials;
(D) Tenants who will occupy areas containing such material.
10
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
o Typically Serious: Due to the hazards associated with asbestos, this citation
will almost always be serious when improperly controlled asbestos
disturbance or removal activities have occurred in the building. A referral to
an IH would be necessary in this situation for a follow-up. However, if no
asbestos disturbance occurred or was likely to occur, an other than serious
citation may be issued.
o Save # 602.8111: ASBESTOS STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION,
PART 602, 1926.1101(k)(2)(ii)
11
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
Appendix B
General Industry Safety and Health Division
General Industry Safety Rules
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Part 1, General Provisions
R 408.10015(3)
SAVE 1-4
The floor of a work area, passageway, or aisle was not maintained free of hazardous accumulations of
scrap, debris, water, oil, grease, and/or other slip and trip hazards.
Part 2, Floor and Wall Openings, Stairways, and Skylights
R 408.10213(2)
SAVE 2-2
An open-sided floor or platform four feet or more above adjacent floor or ground level was not guarded
by a standard barrier on all open sides, as specified in rules 230, 231, and 233(2) of Part 2.
Part 2, Floor and Wall Openings, Stairways, and Skylights
R 408.10215(2)
SAVE 2-10
A hatchway, floor opening, and/or floor hole into which persons may accidentally walk or through
which material may fall was not guarded, as specified by rule 215(2)(a), rule 215(2)(b), or rule
215(2)(c) of Part 2:
[NOTE: A barrier may be omitted around the perimeter of a pit used for vehicle servicing, if a yellow
caution line is installed around the perimeter of the pit. The line must be 12 inches wide and
maintained to be clearly visible.]
Part 6, Fire Exits
R 408.10631(1)
SAVE 6-1
The components of a means of egress, including doors, stairs, ramps, passages, and signs, were not
maintained in an operable condition.
Part 6, Fire Exits
R 408.10632(1)
SAVE 6-2
A means of egress was not continuously maintained free of all obstructions or impediments to full
instant use in case of fire or other emergency.
Part 6, Fire Exits
R 408.10632(2)
SAVE 6-4
Slide bolts, hasps, hooks and eyes, and similar types of locking devices that are difficult to open against
door pressure were installed or used:
[NOTE: Use this common violation when you find slide bolts, hasps, hooks and eyes, and similar
types of locking devices. Be specific.]
Part 7, Guards for Power Transmission
R 408.10722(1)
SAVE 7-4
Shafting exposed to contact 7 feet or less above a floor or platform level was not guarded.
Part 7, Guards for Power Transmission
R 408.10727(1)
SAVE 7-5
A belt and pulley which was 7 feet or less above the floor or platform and which was exposed to
contact was not guarded.
12
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
9.
10.
11.
Part 7, Guards for Power Transmission
R 408.10731(1)
SAVE 7-8
Gears, sprockets, and/or chain drives exposed to contact were not guarded
Part 8, Portable Fire Extinguisher
R 408.10835(2)
SAVE 8-7
An extinguisher that showed defects which could have possibly affected its operation was not removed
from service and given a complete check.
Part 8, Portable Fire Extinguisher
R 408.10835(2)
SAVE 8-8
An extinguisher did not have a tag attached to it showing the maintenance or recharge date and the
initials or signature of the person who performed the service.
General Industry Health Rules
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Part 472, Medical Services and First Aid
R 325.47201(3)
Ref. No. 472.2320
The employer did not provide suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body
within the work area for immediate emergency use, where the eyes or body of any person may be
exposed to injurious corrosive materials. (Identify specific operation(s) and/or conditions and describe
hazard(s) where necessary.)
Part 472, Medical Services and First Aid
R 325.47201(3)
Ref. No. 472.2330
The employer did not provide a suitable facility for quick flushing of the eyes within the work area for
immediate emergency use, where the eyes of an employee may be exposed to injurious corrosive
materials. (Identify specific operation(s) and/or conditions and describe hazard(s) where necessary.)
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(1)(d)(ii)
Ref. No. 474.2060
The employer did not remove all sweepings, solid or liquid wastes, refuse, and garbage in such a
manner as to avoid creating a menace to health and as often as necessary or appropriate to maintain the
place of employment in a sanitary condition.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(1)(e)
Ref. No. 474.2061
The employer did not have a continuing and effective extermination program instituted where the
presence of vermin were detected [i.e., (specific vermin identity) (specific vermin evidence (i.e.,
droppings, feces, eggs, etc.) were found in (define specific area of harborage)].
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(2)(a)(i)
Ref. No. 474.2062
The employer did not provide potable water at it's place of employment.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(3)(a)(i)
Ref. No. 474.2065
The employer did not provide running water toilets (water closets) in a toilet room in accordance with
Table J-1 of this rule.
13
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(3)(b)(i)
Ref. No. 474.2070
The employer did not provide a separate compartment for each water closet with a door and walls or
partition between fixtures sufficiently high to assure privacy.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(3)(a)(i)
Ref. No. 474.2075
The employer did not provide a lock on the inside of the toilet room entrance door used by both sexes.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(3)(a)(iii)
Ref. No. 474.2077
The employer did not assure that the sewage disposal method did not endanger the health of
employees. Specifically, (describe malfunctioning sewage disposal system).
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(3)(a)(v)
Ref. No. 474.2078
The employer did not provide toilet paper with holder for water closets located (specific location of
water closet(s) without toilet paper).
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(3)(a)(vi)
Ref. No. 474.2079
The employer did not provide covered receptacles in (specific toilet room(s) and/or location(s)) toilet
rooms used by women.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(4)(b)(i)
Ref. No. 474.2080
The employer did not provide lavatories (sinks) in accordance with Table J-2 of this rule.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(4)(b)(ii)
Ref. No. 474.2090
The employer did not provide hot and cold running water or tepid running water for the lavatories
(sinks).
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(4)(b)(iii)
Ref. No. 474.2091
The employer did not provide hand soap or similar hand cleansing agents at the lavatory(s), located
(specific location(s) of lavatory(s)).
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(4)(b)(iv)
Ref. No. 474.2092
The employer did not provide individual hand towels or sections thereof, of cloth or paper, warm-air
blowers or clean individual sections of continuous cloth toweling convenient to the lavatories located
(specific location(s) or lavatory(s)).
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(4)(b)(v)
Ref. No. 474.2093
The employer did not provide receptacles for disposal of used towels at lavatory(s) located (specific
location(s) of lavatory(s)).
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4201(7)(b)
Ref. No. 474.2103
The employer allowed (describe type of food/beverage/consumption) in the (detail of work area) where
(define specific chemical(s) with ingestion warnings) (were, was (choose one)) present.
14
MIOSHA–COM–11-1
January 24, 2011
Cross-Citing Hazards in a Different Discipline or Division
18.
Part 474, Sanitation
Rule 4202(1)(b)
Ref. No. 474.2150
The employer did not assure that the privy on-site was constructed in accordance with Subsection (2)
of this rule, nor in compliance with local/county regulations.
15