UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

	MARITIME ADVISORY COMMITTEE
	FOR
	OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
	(MACOSH)

	Wednesday, June 5, 2019

	8:36 a.m.

	Frances Perkins Building
	Conference Room S-4215 A-C
	200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
	Washington, D.C.  20210
PARTICIPANTS:

Donald V. Raffo, Chair

William Crow

Michael Podue

Robert Godinez

Alice Shumate

Lawrence Russell

David Turner

Amy Sly Liu

Amy Wangdahl

Jennifer Levin

Matthew Layman

Gunter Hoock

James Rone

Regina Farr

Jeremy Riddle

Robert Fiore

Doug Fitzgerald
	C O N T E N T S

                                                  PAGE

Roll-Call, Opening Remarks, Introductions           4

Review of Agenda                                   18

MACOSH Overview                                    28

Presentations:

Presentation on Ethics                             33

Overview of OSHA's Directorate of
     Standards and Guidance                        43

Overview of OSHA's Directorate of
     Enforcement Programs                          63

Overview of OSHA's Training Institute
     & Education Centers                           94

Committee Photograph                              114

OSHA Activities Update                            115

Open Discussion, Closing Remarks                  120

Adjournment                                       136

	P R O C E E D I N G S
		MR. RAFFO:  I think that's all of your procedural issues.
		For the members of the public, there is a sign-in sheet in the back.  We ask that, one, that you sign in, and in a few minutes, after we complete our roll call, we will ask you to just briefly come up to the microphone, state your name and affiliation, and do it clearly so our secretary can transcribe your information correctly.
		Okay, so welcome, everyone.  It's been a long time in coming.  We're glad to get back.  There's been some changes.  As you know, Mr. Thornton, who has been our longtime chairman, has decided to pass the baton and somehow I caught it.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  So -- so welcome.  So this will -- I've been on the committee for several iterations, or several charters, of the MACOSH committee, so I have a little bit of familiarity with it.  We also have a group of members here that have served on MACOSH before, and we also have a group of new members, so I want to welcome all of the -- the new members here.  So as we go forward it'll be a little learning experience for myself and also for some of you.
		You've met our prior chair, Jim Thornton.  I've worked with Jim for a long time.  He was sort of my mentor.  He had a great deal of Southern charm.  Unfortunately, I'm from the Northeast and I'm a -- don't have that level of Southern charm and I'm a little more business-oriented.  So we'll move through it and we'll keep going.
		I have a -- some big shoes to fill to maintain Jim's legacy as we go forward.  So I'm sure you'll all help me and I'll help you and we'll work together and get through this.
		So the first order of business will be a committee roll call.  So when I call your name, I'd just ask that you speak into the microphone and say "aye" that you're here.
		Matthew Layman.
		MR. LAYMAN:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  James Rone.
		MR. RONE:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Alex -- Alice Shumate.
		MS. SHUMATE:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Regina Farr.
		MS. FARR:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Robert Fiore.
		MR. FIORE:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Michael Podue.
		MR. PODUE:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  James Reid.
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Mr. Reid is absent.
		Robert Godinez.
		MR. GODINEZ:  Here.
		MR. RAFFO:  David Turner.
		MR. TURNER:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Donald Raffo, aye.
		William Crow, Bill Crow.  I see he crossed out the William.
		MR. CROW:  Aye.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Jeremy Riddle.
		MR. RIDDLE:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Gunther Hoock.
		MR. HOOCK:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Amy Liu.
		MS. LIU:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  I'm going to say Larry Russell because I've never called you Lawrence.  Larry Russell.
		MR. RUSSELL:  Aye.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  And is Julia Hardaway here?
		PARTICIPANT:  No, we have Doug Fitzgerald.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, Doug Fitzgerald.
		MR. FITZGERALD:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  So you alternate.  Okay, thank you.
		And Amy Wangdahl?
		MS. WANGDAHL:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  Jennifer Levin.
		MS. LEVIN:  Aye.
		MR. RAFFO:  And I'm assuming -- and we also have the OSHA rep, Danielle Watson.  I know she's here somewhere.
		MS. WATSON:  I'm here.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  So we have Amy and we have Jennifer and we have the staff from OSHA here, which -- of course including Danielle -- which will be a tremendous help to our committees as we move forward.  And when I've worked with MACOSH before they've always been a tremendous help to me to get our products out.
		One thing I want to say to the committee as we move forward: I believe we're one of the first re-charters out of the gate from OSHA.  We have been known as being a productive committee.  We've done a lot of products before.  We're basically judged on our output.  I am hoping and anticipating that we continue that high bar, that high standard that Jim Thornton has led us through before, and I hope to keep that up going forward.
		So that being said, moving forward, I'd like to start now with the public introductions.  If you would start at the front, come up to the microphone and just your name and affiliation, please.  Don't be shy.
		PARTICIPANT:  (Inaudible.)
		PARTICIPANT:  Go on.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		PARTICIPANT:  Be my guest.
		MR. GILLAM:  Fred Gillam, ILWU, representing the Walking Bosses/Foremen.
		MR. HALL:  Michael Hall with the Pacific Maritime Association.
		MR. SHAW:  I'm Curtis Shaw with Pacific Maritime Association.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Ray Benavente, ILWU, International Longshore and Warehouse Union.
		MR. BURCHETT:  Tracy Burchett, ILWU, Coast Safety Committee, Small Ports.
		MR. RAFFO:  We got a few others out there?  Don't be shy.
		PARTICIPANT:  The rest are OSHA staff.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, the rest are OSHA staff so I guess you don't have to.  Are we deciding?
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Decided no.  Okay.  All right.  We'll move forward.
		So as we move forward now, our schedule today is a little bit different from the schedule that we'll be doing in the future.  Typically, the first day we will have the workgroups meet, the Longshoring and the Shipyard Workgroup.  Today it's going to be opposite, or this week the workgroups will meet this afternoon and tomorrow.
		So this morning we will have some -- some presentations, some information, some talk of photographs, some open discussion, general information.  Our typical meeting, as I said, will be the workgroups followed by the full committee meeting on the following day.
		Towards the end of the full committee meeting, typically the -- both the shipyard and the longshoring group will report out.  Normally it's done through a PowerPoint presentation that is accepted into the record.  So that'll follow.
		Just as a procedural issue for this afternoon, we are going to split up, obviously, into two groups: shipyard and longshoring.  I'm assuming all our members know what committee you are on.  So this -- it will be in this room; the room will be split in half.  And just so we can schedule it, from the public standpoint, could I have a show of hands on how many members will be attending the longshoring session?  Shipyard?  All right.  So it looks like most of the public will be in the longshoring session, so we will have a bigger room for the longshoring session than we will for the shipyard at this point.
		So going forward, I've -- last time we had -- at the charter of MACOSH, I developed this PowerPoint because we have some new members and you're saying, well, I'm on the committee, what do I do, what do we do, how do I participate, how do I help, what do we provide to the agency.  So I came up with this fairly short PowerPoint to give you, give us, a few hinters -- a few hinters?  A few hints.
		So as we go forward, so as -- once again, welcome to MACOSH.  What do we do?  What will you be expected to do?  What's our focus?  Our focus is on products, and we'll talk about products in a minute.  And as you know, we have two groups so I'm going to talk briefly about how the two groups act, how we interact, and when we give a final product, how the final product is given to the agency.
		You may have seen this in the Federal Register.  This is your charter.  This is the detailed things that the agency expects from us, what we're supposed to -- supposed to do, how we're supposed to act, what we're supposed to provide to the agency.  You've all seen it, but hopefully I'm going to tell you what it means.
		So we've got a two-year charter.  How do we support our charter?  The agency may come to us and ask for their help -- our help on certain issues.  We may suggest methods to reduce maritime injuries to the agency.  We may support and review standards as requested.  And we may -- and one of our main focuses has been the development of injury-reduction products, and I'll get into those in a second.
		Essentially, I'm going to say we have about five different areas and maybe today will be a sixth, but these are the six things we primarily work through: fact sheets; quick cards; SHIPS documents; whitepapers; and guidance documents.  And they each have a specific format, I'll call it.
		A fact sheet, typically eight and a half by 11, basic background information on safety and health hazards for employers and workers, usually web-based documents that you can view or download and print as a PDF.  And as an example, this is one of the fact sheets that the committee has developed.
		This came out of the shipyard group: Confined Space Safety on Commercial Fishing Vessels.  This was a document that we wrote, we developed, we provided to the agency, and it's now published and is available on the website.  It's directed as a high-level information sheet for workers working in the commercial fishing industry on the hazards of confined spaces.  And you can see it's about a two-page document, and got a few pictures, got a lot of references, a lot of directions, and that's a lot of what has been done in the past.  And you can see that the agency provided you with a list of documents that we've worked on in the past.
		Another item is a quick card, small, laminated cards that provide safety, health and workers' reg information in brief, plain language.  They're almost always a printed document meant for workers.  There's an initiative to do one side in English, one side in Spanish or some other language; or two cards, same topic, one in English and one in Spanish.  And I say Spanish -- a lot of our maritime workers are Spanish but that in your area may not be true, whether it be Vietnamese or some other local language.  We've had the benefit at least on the shipyard side of having Robert help us with the translation of some of the documents.  He's able to speak Spanish as opposed to me, who I have trouble with English.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  But it's been a help and the agency has presented a lot of these products in different languages, and I've actually gone to shipyards and they've commented to me that there -- they have a lot of Spanish workers and they have trouble communicating, so they're very happy that these documents have come out in different languages.  They're able to hand them out, because a lot of the trainers speak in -- speak English and a lot of the employees cannot understand it.  So it's been I personally think a help to the workers in the industry.
		This is an example of a quick card that we did: Protecting Workers from Heat Stress.  You can see it's just a short card with some bullet points, high-level topics.
		We also have done SHIPS documents.  SHIPS stands for Safety and Health Injury Prevention Sheets.  These are fairly detailed documents.  They started from OSHA committee and it says they're being completed, but a lot of them have been completed if they're not all complete by now.  They're informational.  They can be used for safety meetings, toolbag talks.  A lot of photos, posters, information for the employer to provide to workers.
		We did one on ship-fitting.  I don't know how many pages it is.  It's probably around 20 pages, something like that.  But it's fairly extensive.  It provides -- it's a lot of work, provides a lot of information to I'll call it craftsmen in the industry.  So they are out there.  These are typically long-term projects.  And this is just another page of the document.
		Whitepapers.  Occasionally the agency will ask us to form a position on a question, so these whitepapers are position or informational documents presented to the agency on various topics that would represent suggestions, positions, guidance or informational statements from MACOSH, from us.
		One of the whitepapers we have and can see right here -- it's very hard to see but it's called Shipyard-Related Employment.  This was put out by MACOSH, and it primarily dealt with -- many of you in the industry know that we have had a, one, a lot of new workers; two, the way the industry, at least the shipyards, are -- have changed is from permanent employees to contract employees.  It gave some information to the agency on how to deal with these issues.
		And guidance documents.  They come in three sizes: eight and a half by 11, and you can see them there for employers and workers.  They are usually larger documents for employers.  They go into the details of the hazards that aren't covered by a standard, and they can be more of a explanation of a current standard.
		Sometimes they'll be a guidance document and a fact sheet, and this was done with barge safety.  We have a 36-page guidance document on deck barge safety, and a two-page fact sheet on sped barge safe -- accidents.  I'm sorry.
		And this is an example of a guidance document.  This has had to do with sampling and analysis of toxic materials.
		Some other informational products which we've participated in is posters -- posters are fairly self-explanatory -- and pocket guides.  They've developed some booklets to educate workers about the hazards and provide resources in there.
		We have the brown books for the shipyard.  They're no longer brown, they're actually blue, and they have longshoring books too.
		And as I said before, the agency provided this document to us.  This is some of the products that this committee has worked on in the past, and which leads us into sort of where do we go from here.
		Today, this afternoon, you'll be meeting with your chairs, Matt and Amy, and you will be setting the agenda for the next almost two years.  This is probably the most important meeting that we're going to have because what you decide today you'll be working on for almost the next two years.  We'll add things to the plate, we'll take things off as the plate -- as they're completed, but the plan is to have you go in with three products that are on your plate that you're sort of working on.  We will also -- you know, it will be a good idea to have some backup products to think about, not necessarily work on, because they can be a little bit distracting, but to start to go forward on.
		So I'm going to -- you know, as you're sitting here this morning, start thinking about in this context that we just presented some of the issues in your particular industry that may need to be addressed in one way or the other.
		Big thing here:  you're all on this committee, we know you're busy.  You got selected for the committee because you're busy.  Busy people get things done.  So there will be homework you're going to be working on, and that's actually when the bulk of the work is going to get done, in between committee meetings, in between conference calls.  You will have conference calls periodically, as developed by your chairs, and on these conference calls you will final -- start to finalize your products, start to craft your products.  Hopefully you'll use your expertise, your industry contacts, to provide the agency with the best product going forward.
		So there's going to be a lot of work done between meetings.  It's sort of -- as Jim Thornton has said, it's where the sausage is made, so where you're doing the mixing, doing the final scheduling, and you're going to come to this meeting hopefully with a final product.
		Now, each group, whether it's longshoring or shipyard, whatever product we provide to the agency will be a joint MACOSH document, which means when the shipyard group has completed a product, they will provide it to the longshore group; the longshore group will review, comment, critique, whatever the word you want to use, send their thoughts back to the shipyard group, and the shipyard group will tweak it.
		When we think it's tweaked adequately, we will present it to the full MACOSH committee for voting.  Once it's voted on by the full MACOSH committee, it will go to the agency and it will be a MACOSH document.  It will not be a shipyard document, it will not be a longshoring document; it will be a MACOSH document.
		And the same thing will happen with the longshoring group.  You'll develop a product, you'll submit it to the shipyard group, they will comment on it, they will sent it back.  And from my past experience -- I'm a shipyard guy.  I've learned I'm going to say a lot because I started from nothing and I learned -- I've learned a lot about the longshoring industry.  I'm not even close to being an expert, and I'm not even close to being up to par with some of our members in the longshoring area here.
		But I do know a little bit about it and one thing I learned when the longshoring group submitted items to the shipyard group and vice versa is that sometimes we commented on items that the longshoring group provided; we thought we knew what we were talking about but the longshoring group was the experts and we didn't know.  We thought, well, this isn't right and it turns out, well, it was right.  We just don't work in that industry and we didn't understand it.
		So what I'm telling you is don't let your feelings get hurt.  If the other group comes back and says, "What about this?  We don't think this is right," you may say, "Yes, it is right because," and that's fine.  So just go with it in the spirit of cooperation because you may be reviewing documents that you're not totally familiar with, and I know that's happened when we submitted shipyard documents to the longshoring group.  They came back from their perspective and we said, "No, that's not right, this is the way we do it in the shipyards."
		But once again, have some -- a little bit of thick skin.  It's no -- not a personal attack on anyone.  It's -- the point is to try to make the product the best product it can be.  So we will be working together.
		I will ask -- there's one thing that drives me crazy when we get to the one-yard line and we're ready to vote on a product.  I want to make sure that everybody has fully vetted it.  I don't want it to come to a motion to accept and then one of the groups says, "We're not ready," and we have to pull it back.  I want it to be thoroughly ready.  When we make a motion to accept by the full MACOSH committee, I would like both groups to have thoroughly vetted it, been in agreement, and we are ready to get -- get through it.
		We had that happen once or twice before.  Sort of a little bit of a pet peeve of mine, but once again I've let -- I'm going to work with all of you.  As I said, this will be a little bit of a learning experience for me and for some of the new members, and we have some experienced members here that have gone through this before and know what the deal is.
		But take your time.  If we have to postpone it, we will postpone it.  I just don't want to postpone it at the last minute.  I want us to be united as we go into the final product.
		So, once again, this morning start thinking about where we're going because, once again, the -- the usefulness of this committee, we are not automatically re-chartered.  As some of you know, this has been a long, painful -- and not really -- when I say painful, it hasn't been painful for me; it's been painful for Amy, probably for Bill and some others to get this committee to where we've been re-chartered.  I don't know all the details that they've went through, but I know they've gone through a lot and it's been a lot of work to get us where we are today.
		So we want to prove our worth, prove our usefulness and provide our expertise and knowledge to the agency as we go forward, and I know you'll all do that.
		As I said before, this committee has been one of the most productive committees of all the advisory committees to the agency, so we are held to a high, high standard and I want to keep that moving forward and get things rolling.  So that's why, once again, especially for some of the new members today, I stress that this is the most -- probably the most important meeting as we go forward because we're setting the agenda, we're setting items we're going to work on.  It doesn't mean they're set in stone, but they're at least carved in wood.
		So, as I said this before, how do we interact?  We talk to each other.  We each develop a product.  Longshoring and shipyard set forward in our areas of expertise.  We provide that document to the other group.  We get comments back and we vote on it as a united committee.
		So we'll set our initial agenda today.  I'll be leaning in, once again, on Matt and Amy as we go forward today and tomorrow.  We will meet I believe same room tomorrow.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  I think.
		MR. RAFFO:  So I --
		MS. WANGDAHL:  We move.  We move, right?
		PARTICIPANT:  Yeah.
		MR. RAFFO:  So we will not be here tomorrow.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  Well, this afternoon we will tell you where to go.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  If we tell you now --
		MR. RAFFO:  It'll change.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  -- you're not going to remember, so we'll just tell you tomorrow.
		MR. RAFFO:  So -- so we will meet tomorrow, we just don't know where.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  We will give you clear instructions for tomorrow.
		MR. RAFFO:  Right.  So, once again, today you're going to start thinking about products, about issues, about what's happened in my industry that we think that OSHA can provide, whether it's a guidance document, a fact sheet, advisory information.
		You've going to hear this morning how the agency I believe is going to come to us and talk about the -- the OSHA courses and how they're going to ask for some help on that.  So that's probably going to be high on our agenda.  And we're going to throw a few other things on the plate too that, you know, if we decide to take that on it will be a fairly substantial commitment.
		So we will work on those things.  As we finish a product, another one will move up.  Maybe it will move other things on.  But, once again, in your industry, think: did you have an injury?  Could it have been prevented?  How could it have prevent -- been have (sic) prevented?
		Once again, when you're developing your products, I want you to think about what is the message, what is the issue, who's the audience.  The audience is very important.  Are you speaking to the worker?  Are you speaking to management?  Are you speaking to upper-level management?  So keep that mind.  What's the message, who's the audience, and focus on those things.  And that sounds easy; it's not always as easy as it sounds.  So keep that in mind when you're developing documents as we move forward.
		We'll add things, we'll drop things, we'll continue to move forward.  And as I said, this is the most important meeting, so begin to start thinking of issues in your industry.
		So with that being said, I'm going to ask is there any questions?  Otherwise we will move on and get going.  I will be as, once again, in my role as chair, I will be bopping in between the two meetings, listening in, providing suggestions, trying to educate myself as you move forward.  But at those meetings your two chairs will be running the show and guiding you through the process, and I will work with that.
		Yes, sir.
		MR. TURNER:  Mr. Chairman, the last -- at the last charter of MACOSH there was a trifold document that was introduced that was, like, tree-trimming I believe and we -- you know, we previous worked -- had done some work on that.  Is that product still something that OSHA plans on putting out with the MACOSH group?
		MS. WANGDAHL:  You're talking about a tree-care document?
		MR. TURNER:  No, it was a trifold.  It was a small --
		MS. WANGDAHL:  Oh, you're talking about format.
		MR. TURNER:  Right, the format.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  So Don covered a lot of my stuff, so I didn't have to do a PowerPoint this morning, but that would have been one of the things, is that we have -- we have some carry-over items from the last charter that the agency was not allowed to move on because they were still in the committee.  So this afternoon in your workgroup you'll receive a list of those items.  It'll be up to the workgroups to decide what they want to do with them.
		So if you decide that that's a document that you want to put on your plate, we came out with -- there should be three products that are actively being worked at any time.  That's probably a really good amount for the size of the workgroups.  So you'll go through those, that list of carry-on items, if there's anything new, and then later on you're going to hear from Annette Braam, and we actually have an assignment for MACOSH.  So it'll be up to you whether or not you want to proceed with that.
		MR. TURNER:  Well, I was more concerned about that format.  Is that format still available to try?  The little -- it was a trifold format rather than a quick card, a different format that we were showing.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  We can make an argument for it.
		MR. TURNER:  Okay.  Thank you.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  Can I --
		MR. RAFFO:  Yeah.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  So Don covered a lot of -- like I said, he covered a lot of what I normally would have done, which is -- I'm perfectly okay with him doing that.  But we are very excited that MACOSH is up and running again.  It's been almost three years since we had our last meeting, and that charter was cut short, but that charter did put forth 11 recommendations in a very short amount of time, and you have -- this charter expires in December of 2020.  So you have about 18 months, but your membership doesn't expire until April 2021, so you still have the full two years.
		We are dedicated to having two meetings every year that we can.  Obviously, this is -- we won't get another one in this fiscal year but we're hoping for December and May to get two more in for next year.  So we're excited to get started on some of the products that were carry-over items, like Dave was talking about.  We're excited for some new products.
		Danielle is the OSHA rep for the shipyard group and Nick DeAngelis, who's with our Directorate of Enforcement Programs, who's at another meeting this morning.  He'll be joining us.  He is our Longshore Workgroup rep.  You should feel free to use them and myself if you have any questions.  This is -- part of the purpose of MACOSH is to develop and foster relationships amongst industry and then with OSHA so, you know, feel free to have open dialogue.
		I also want to introduce Joel Batchelor.  You've been all dealing with him for travel.  Chris Shaw, who is normally the person, is out on some health leave.  So Joel has stepped up.  He is going to come into the workgroups this afternoon if there are any specific travel questions, rather than handling them now.  But one key item is keep your receipts, and they're due in five days.  But Joel will be stopping in the workgroups to answer any questions.
		And then also on my staff is Surender Ahir.  He will be in the Longshore Workgroup and then -- I'm sorry, Shipyard Workgroup.  And Acie Zachary in the back is also on my staff; he will be in the Longshore Workgroup.  Again, these are two outstanding gentlemen in my office that can help you with anything.
		And then I'd be remiss if I didn't introduce my boss, Bill Perry, directorate of -- Director of Standards and Guidance.  He is going to give a presentation later on about MACOSH.
		But again, we're happy to be here, happy to get started, and look forward to seeing what we can do with this charter.
		MR. RAFFO:  Joel, I just want to give you a quick shout-out.  This was the best travel experience I've had working with the agency.  It was seamless.  It worked like it was supposed to.  My airline number popped up.  It -- all of a sudden it was on my phone.  It was great.
		MR. BATCHELOR:  Good to hear.  Thank you.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  So great job.  I just wanted to recognize you on that because, you know, I know the system's changed and I'm not disparaging anyone, but it worked like it should and thank you, thank you.  It was just -- made it easy.  So I appreciate it.
		MR. BATCHELOR:  Thank you.
		MR. RAFFO:  So any other questions as we move forward?
		MS. LEVIN:  I would like to move into the record your PowerPoint presentation.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  Move into the record your PowerPoint presentation.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  Go ahead.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  Should we do that now?
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, all right.
		MS. LEVIN:  Okay.  At this time I'd like to move into the docket as exhibit 43 the PowerPoint presentation by Chairman Raffo.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  So moving forward now, and is -- let me ask, one, is there any questions from the public, from anyone out there?  Move forward?
		MS. FARR:  Mr. Chair, I have a question.
		MR. RAFFO:  Yes.
		MS. FARR:  (Inaudible) about an alternate.  If I wasn't able to come to a meeting, can anyone just come in my place or how does that -- were there -- are they a committee member or how does that work?
		MR. RAFFO:  I will let Jennifer answer that.
		MS. LEVIN:  No, you can't send an alternate.  You're serving personally.
		MS. FARR:  Okay.
		MS. LEVIN:  So you'll -- you'll just be absent.  Members of the public who attend the committee meetings are able to attend the workgroup meetings, so --
		MS. FARR:  Okay.
		MS. LEVIN:  -- if there's someone, if you have a colleague who would like to attend the workgroup meetings, you know, just to give you --
		MS. FARR:  Just to cover it.
		MS. LEVIN:  Right.  That would -- that would work too, but really cannot speak on your behalf.
		MS. FARR:  Okay.
		MR. RAFFO:  Let me ask one question for the gentleman recording.  Do you want us to mention our names prior to speaking or are you okay?
		MR. CARR:  It's not necessary.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  Okay, thank you.  So any more questions?  We good?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  We will move on now to the presentation on ethics from Vanessa Myers, from the Office of the Solicitor.
		MS. MYERS:  Good morning, everybody, and I just want to thank you all for joining us on behalf of the Solicitor's Office.  I know OSHA very much appreciates your service, and we do as well.
		So I will not be taking up too much of your time today, but I want to reinforce the ethics rules which are applicable to you as members of this committee.  So if you want to turn to tab 6 in your handbook, you'll find my materials.
		So individuals who are full-time employees of the federal government are held to a wide variety of rules and regulations, both criminally and civilly, in regards to ethics.  But similarly, people who work with the government, like yourselves, but who are not employees are still expected to uphold a standard of conduct so that we can ensure public trust in the integrity of the government and in the integrity of its processes.
		So these materials here are your guidelines moving forward, if you have any questions.  But if you notice right on page 2 of the document, there is contact information for the Ethics Office in the Office of the Solicitor.  We have a counsel for ethics, Rob Sadler, as well as attorneys Zach Mancher and myself.  Our phone numbers and emails are listed there.  Any questions that you have, please feel free to email or call us.  We're here to serve all of you and to answer any questions.  So don't ever be afraid to reach out.
		But you'll also see the two designated agency ethics officials listed on this page.  That's our solicitor, Kate O'Scannlain, and the associate solicitor for my office, Peter Constantine.  So you can also reach out to them as well.
		So if you want to turn to page 3, these are just the most -- a general overview of the most important rules for everyone.  The first thing that I think is most critical, especially for a group like this, is the misuse of government affiliation.  You should not use your association with the government, including business contacts obtained through your work, to try to obtain personal benefits or favors to yourself, your friends, your relatives or your business associates.
		Because you're not a federal employee, you should not represent that you act on behalf of the federal government unless you've been specifically authorized to do so, you know, as a part of this committee.  Therefore, you shouldn't be using a government logo or seal on any of your business cards, personal business cards, personal stationery, or refer to a government office on your business card, unless your relationship is made explicitly clear.
		So, for example, you know, a member of this committee, but you shouldn't just put this committee name on a business card.
		In addition, you shouldn't use your government affiliation to endorse a product or to -- or an enterprise in any way.  So you shouldn't say, you know, this particular cleanser or other sort of product is -- you know, you give it the stamp of approval on behalf of this committee.  That's -- that would be in violation of the rules.
		In a similar vein, a misuse of government resources.  When you're here and working in the building or if you're using government resources in any way, equipment, which is like computers and copiers, government supplies including envelopes or letterhead or telephone and fax services, you should only use that -- those devices if necessary and in relation to your government work.
		The Department of Labor's manual does allow some de minimis use.  So, for example, if you needed to call back to your offices to have a short conversation with someone, that would be permissible.  But in general, you should -- you should be only using the government equipment and resources for government work as a part of this committee.
		And then I saw that Mr. Raffo touched on travel already, but please make sure that, you know, you have documented all your travel and you're following the processes which OSHA follow very well.
		Does anybody have any questions on those first two parts I went over?
		(No response.)
		MS. MYERS:  Okay, on to page 4, the misuse of government information, and I do also want to underscore this one.  You may obtain certain information as a part of your work with the federal government that may not be used for private activities or disseminated to persons outside of the government unless they are specifically authorized.  I'm sure that OSHA and everyone else will do a good job of making those delineations to you, but in general, there is a whole list here of information that should not be shared with outside sources unless you're specifically authorized to share that information or that information is part of public information.
		So if it's on our websites, if it's part of a press release, if it's something that the general public has access to, you're fine to share it; but if it's something you only know as being a part of this committee -- and that can include proprietary business data and trade secrets, any non-public data, sometimes economic analyses, private personnel information, classified national security information and pre-decisional deliberations of the government -- release or dissemination of such information could result in criminal or civil charges, depending on what it is you're releasing.
		So we take this very seriously.  Please be careful before you talk about some of the work that you're doing here and make sure you're very clear on what is public and what is proprietary or non-public.
		Next we have conflicts of interest, and I think this one can be particularly tricky since, you know, you're serving on this committee but you all have full, you know, full-time outside employment.
		But if there are government matters that you are asked to work on or discuss in which the organization you represent or your employer has an interest, we highly recommend that you disclose this interest both to your fellow committee members and to OSHA.  That disclosure should be made verbally and recorded in the public record prior to working on or discussing -- or discussing this issue.
		So that's pretty straightforward and I will let you know, it's much simpler than the conflict-of-interest rules that full-time federal employees have.  But if you have a question or if you're concerned about something, you can absolutely talk it over with any of the OSHA representatives, but you can also contact our office and say, "You know, I'm a little bit concerned about this," and we will talk you through it and give you advice.
		The best part about coming to our office and relying on our advice is that it provides you a safeguard in the future if an outside organization like the IG or some other entity would question some sort of action.  If you gave us all the relevant information and relied on our advice, you're covered in terms of your actions.  So it's very important if you have any questions on that.
		Also, and this is sort of part and parcel of this, you may have other business with the Department of Labor.  In fact, I imagine many of you do.  But we strongly encourage you that, if you have that business, to deal with it on days where you're not here as a part of this committee.
		So we've had some issues in the past, not with this committee necessarily, but where employees were jumping out of committee meetings, going and knocking on people's doors, having impromptu questions about things.  Please try to keep your interests with the Department of Labor that are outside this committee to separate days.  Set up a meeting on a separate day or have someone else in your office handle that interaction if you are here on committee business.
		Does anybody have any questions on that?
		(No response.)
		MS. MYERS:  We're covered.  All right.  You guys are good.
		(Laughter.)
		MS. MYERS:  The last thing that I just want to talk about are political activities, and much like with outside work, it's best to keep your political activities and your service to the Department of Labor separate.
		Under the Hatch Act, much like federal employees, you may not engage in partisan political activities while on government premises or with the assistance of government equipment.  A partisan political activity is any activity directed towards the success or failure of a political party, a current candidate for partisan political office, or a partisan political group.
		So that's the limitation on it.  You cannot advocate for or against a political party, a current candidate for partisan political office, or a partisan political group.  That is while you are in the building or with the assistance of government equipment.
		So I'll give you a quick example.  If you're here in this building and you wanted to talk about some sort of environmental issues, that's fine, even if maybe those positions are somewhat associated with one party or another party.  You're talking about an issue; that's perfectly acceptable.  You could not, however, advocate for or against either the President, who is a current candidate for office, or any of the 20 to 30 or, maybe by this point in the day, 40 different candidates on the Democratic side.  That's not permissible to advocate for or against any of their elections or reelections.
		In terms of using government equipment, that means if you are on the premises and you're, you know, using a government computer, you cannot send an email related to partisan political activity.  And that's the limitation.
		There could be additional rules depending on your specific arrangement, although I largely don't think there are with this committee.  Usually those rules are for contractor -- contractors or interns.
		Does anybody have any questions about the political activity piece?
		(No response.)
		MS. MYERS:  All right.  Well, that's all I have today.  I want to thank you so much for your attention.  And again, reach out to us if you have any questions.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, thank you.  Okay, moving on.  Now I'd like to introduce Bill Perry, Director of Standards and Guidance.  I've worked with Bill for a long time.  We started when I was sort of wet behind the ears and moved up, and Bill has always been a great asset to us and has worked to get us re-chartered, so I look forward to working with you again, Bill.  Welcome.
		MR. PERRY:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  It is a real pleasure to be here in front of this committee again.  I know it's been a while, and I know that Don said, yes, we worked very hard to get this committee re-chartered and staffed, but the effort was of course very worth it.
		I'll make one little correction to something that has been said a couple times, that this is one of the most productive committees.  I think it is the most productive committee and we've -- the contribution that you all have made over the years is really quite astounding and I think has made a real difference in ensuring safety and health for maritime employees.  So I thank you for your -- your past efforts.
		Those of you who are new to the committee, this is going to be a real experience.  I think you're going to enjoy it greatly because the collection of expertise around the table here is just a lot of fun to work -- to work with.  So I'm really looking forward to it.
		I -- in putting this presentation together, I will confess that I didn't really focus on the agenda, and I only have 15 minutes so I'm going to go fairly quickly, but you all will have the slides here which will have some additional information, and of course if you have questions we'll be glad to take those too.
		I'm going to first just catch everybody up on some rulemaking initiatives that we've engaged in over the past few years and a few initiatives, review some of the status-of-guidance products that this committee has produced or may be working on in the future, and then, oh, another couple of interesting initiatives you should just be aware of and you may be interested for your own -- for your own organizations to participate in a particular campaign that we're running.
		So first to the rulemaking effort, we have completed a number of standards over the last couple of years, and I'm just going to highlight how they're relevant to the maritime community.
		First we have the Standards Improvement Project Phase IV.  This has been an initiative that we've been running for a number of years.  The idea is we know we have a lot of old, outdated standards.  Things become obsolete.  Things -- certain requirements maybe don't -- aren't as important today as they were back in the day.
		So we have an effort where we periodically comb through our standards and look for opportunities to update them, remove or revise outdated or duplicative requirements or unnecessary requirements, or requirements that may be inconsistent with -- with current occupational safety and health and medical practices.
		So this was our fourth effort.  This was really not in the Directorate of Standards and Guidance.  This was led by our Directorate of Construction because most of what was in this -- this rule dealt with construction standards, but there were a few things related to shipyard employment involving a few standards that you should just be aware of.
		First of all, on the Asbestos Standard, as you -- I'm sure you're familiar, there is now -- there has been for many, many years requirements for periodic chest X-rays, the standard 14-by-17-inch chest film.  We have now updated that standard to permit the use of digital X-rays and use of the International Labor Organization's digital standard films for pneumoconiosis.  So that's an example of how we updated a standard to reflect newer technology that many people are taking advantage of today.
		In addition, for both asbestos and chromium and most of our -- I think all of our other health standards, come to think of it -- we have removed the requirement for employers to use Social Security numbers on exposure in medical records.  This was something that was put into our standards initially back in the -- back since the `70s, really, with the belief that that way epidemiologists would be able to get records from different employers and be able to match worker exposure and medical histories together where employees have worked for several employers over their tenures.
		So that hasn't really happened.  The records are too disparate between employers to really be terribly useful, and of course today we're very, very concerned about identity theft issues, so we have removed that requirement to use Social Security numbers on health standards records, or records required by those standards.
		And finally, we made a change in our standard, our shipyard standard, for vermin control.  You'll be happy to hear now that feral cats are no longer considered vermin to be controlled.  Believe it or not, we actually had petitions to change -- to change that.  So we took the opportunity that there's a SIPs -- a SIPs rulemaking going on to go ahead and make that change.  So you can keep your feral cats.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. PERRY:  Whoops.  As you know, back in 2016 OSHA revised its recordkeeping -- injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting standards to require firms of particular sizes to submit their 300A, Form 300s and Form 301s, the 300A being the injury -- the annual injury and illness summary, and the 300 and 301 forms are the more detailed reports of injury.
		This year we have published a final rule, after proposing it last year -- the rule was published in January -- to rescind the requirement to provide OSHA with the 300 and 301 forms, citing a couple of reasons.  First of all, it would have been very resource intensive for OSHA to have combed through all of that detailed data and ensure that there was no personally identifiable information contained in those records in the database, in addition to the cost of building the web-based reporting system to begin with.
		In addition, that final rule also adds the employee identification number to the -- to the injury and illness forms that are still required to be reported to OSHA, the 300As.
		Most of you, I think, are aware that we, OSHA, published a major health standard on crystalline silica, covering all industries -- general industry, maritime and construction -- back in 2016.  All of those standards are now fully enforceable.  I -- with the exception of there may be some engineering control phase-in requirements still to come, but most of -- for the most part these standards are -- have been enforced over the last couple of years.
		I bring this to your attention -- I know that silica is not a huge issue for the maritime industry, but I did want to just alert you to our guidance and outreach page.  We have a lot of very useful information coming from that standard on this page.  We have small entity compliance guides, fact sheets, we have some videos, mostly geared to construction operations because that's really where the action is with respect to this particular hazard.
		Excuse me.  But in particular, just this past January, we published some FAQs pertaining to the general industry and maritime standards for crystalline silica, and these FAQs are interesting because they were actually developed in collaboration with industry and labor representatives, and those just went up this past January.
		So if you're interested in some of the nuances of how the standard works, you might want to take a look at those FAQs.
		Beryllium I know is of interest, I think, to maritime industries.  It has had, I will say, a bit of a convoluted history but it's -- but we're getting there.  We're getting close to the end.  Recall that we published two standards for beryllium back in January of 2017, one for general industry, the other covered construction and shipyards.
		We published recently -- or not recently but in June of 2017 we published a proposed amendment to the construction and shipyard rule to rescind the ancillary provisions while retaining the new permissible exposure limits of .2 micrograms per cubic meter as a TWA, and two -- suddenly I'm blanking out.  We have a short-term exposure limit; I think it's 2 micrograms per cubic meter, but check me on that.
		Those PELs remain in force, those new PELs, but the ancillary provisions -- requirements for exposure assessment, medical surveillance, training, all the other specific requirements we typically have in a health standard -- we proposed to rescind.
		So we are looking at the comments.  We got a considerable amount of comment on that proposal, and we'll be coming out with a final action later -- hopefully later this year as a final rule.  So look for that.
		On the general industry side, we were sued by a number of parties.  We did negotiate a settlement with some of those parties and agreed to basically make some clarifications in the general industry rule.  We were made aware that some of the requirements in the general industry standard could lead to some unintended effects, and some people just weren't clear on exactly what we meant.  So we are -- we published a direct final rule last year on the general industry rule just clarifying a few definitions, and we proposed changes to the general industry rule to clarify some additional provisions.
		The enforcement -- we are currently enforcing that general industry standard.  So employers can either comply with the standard as it was published in 2017 or they could comply with the proposed revisions under our enforcement policy that allows employers to comply with proposed rules.  So we're currently enforcing those standards but we are working on finalizing that general industry rule as well.  And as I said, the PELs for construction and shipyard are currently enforceable.
		And here you see a reference to a variety of guidance FAQs, medical surveillance guidelines for beryllium as well.
		Also, in 2016 we published what we call our walking-working surfaces rule.  This is really a fall protection updated standard for general industry, addressing slips, trips and falls.  It covers maintenance of walking-working surfaces, training, ladder and stairway requirements, and personal fall protection devices.
		The reason I bring this up is just to say that we updated -- and I'm sure our Directorate of Enforcement will have more to say on this -- but we recently published an updated shipyard toolbag directive, which, in part, describes how this general industry fall protection standard will apply to shipyard employment.
		We are currently in the midst of updating our Hazard Communication Standard.  Back in 2012 we amended our HAZCOM Standard to adopt the Globally Harmonized System for Hazard Communication or Communication of Hazardous Chemicals.
		This system has internationally agreed upon standardized pictograms and hazard phrases and key words that various countries are now adopting so that SDSs will basically look very similar to each other in terms of communication.  They won't necessarily be similar in terms of the hazard information they convey because part of that is, as you know, is -- requires some scientific and professional judgment of data.  But at least in terms of how the information is conveyed, we'll be harmonized across several countries.
		So in 2012 we updated our hazard communication to bring in the third -- what was then the third edition of the GHS.  In addition, we're working very closely with Canada for those who comply with their workplace hazardous materials information system -- that's essentially their HAZCOM standard -- to make sure that we're harmonized well with Canada.
		At this point the GHS is up to the seventh edition, and so our proposal will bring in the updated GHS information as well as address a number of other issues that have come up since our 2012 standard was published.  There were a number of issues dealing with things like small -- how to label small containers and issues dealing with inventory and warehousing that will be -- that we have issued interpretations of some of these provisions, and our intent now is to codify those interpretations so that they're right there in the rule itself.
		A couple of new initiatives we're working on.  One that you may be interested in: emergency response and preparedness.  We currently regulate a number of aspects of emergency response and preparedness, and these standards are quite old.  Some of them were promulgated several decades ago, and none were really designed to be a comprehensive emergency response and preparedness standard.
		So they don't address the full range of hazards that face emergency responders.  They don't reflect changes in performance specifications for protective clothing and equipment.  As you know, there's been a lot of technological change in terms of the protective equipment that emergency responders now use.
		So our intent is to update -- it's actually to develop a comprehensive emergency response and preparedness standard to update what we have now.
		We, a few years back, did publish a request for information.  We had a stakeholder meeting.  Currently we're at the stage where we develop some regulatory alternatives and seek comment from small businesses.  This is a statutorily required process that OSHA has to go through from the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, SBREFA for short.
		We also recently published a request for information concerning powered industrial trucks.  Again, this is an update effort.  We have standards covering powered industrial trucks.  I don't know if -- particularly if PITs are of keen interest to the maritime community, but I imagine you all use powered industrial trucks here and there, forklifts and such.
		Our standard, dated from 1969, was based on the ANSI standard at the time, and consequently we only cover 11 of 19 types of powered industrial trucks that we know are out there now.  So we're working to develop a proposed rule that will incorporate an updated version of that ANSI standard; it's B56.1.  And right now we -- I think the record, in fact, on this request for information closes on Monday, June 10th.
		And then we have been working on a shipyard fall protection standard covering scaffolds, ladders, other working surfaces.  We published again a request for information back in 2016.  This is slated as a long-term action on a regulatory agenda.
		Now, during the last charter, we did get assistance from MACOSH with getting information related to scaffolds, ladders and other working surfaces, and we really appreciate that, and we may be coming back to you during this charter as our rulemaking efforts continue.  So just be aware of that.
		Now, going on to guidance activity, in the last charter we got 11 recommendations for publishing guidance from MACOSH.  There were 10 guidance products and then information I think related to Subpart E is the 11th one.  I'm trying to think of how we count these.  But basically 10 guidance products.
		We've published five of those 10 up to now, and we're working to finalize a sixth one, temporary worker training in shipyards.  Of the remaining four, we're still considering a draft guidance product, safe lashing in marine terminals.  Another guidance product, protecting workers from toxic preservative coatings, we intend to come back to the committee for some additional development on that one.  And then there were two others which were both quick cards that we decided since we had an existing fact sheet that probably wasn't the best use of our resources to finalize those.
		Here you see a list of all the recommended MACOSH documents since 2015.  This list is from the previous charter and the bit before, I believe, and you can see that -- I don't know exactly how many are on this chart, but all but two -- the two that I just mentioned -- have been published up to now.  So I appreciate members here who have worked on those past products and they are out there for people to use.
		One of -- one of the really important functions of MACOSH, something we really appreciate because it's very difficult for us to do, is to take some of our guidance products and get them into Spanish language.  And this was mentioned earlier today by Don, and here you see a list of mostly quick cards, one fact sheet, that have been published in Spanish.
		And this I think is a real service to Hispanic employees in shipyards and in longshoring.  So it would have been very difficult for OSHA to come out with these on their own.  It's just very expensive, quite frankly, for us to get translation services that let us do this.  So your efforts in that regard have been very much appreciated.
		I think the last thing -- how am I doing on time?  I'm about out of time.  So I think what I'm going to do just -- I just want to make you aware of our Safe and Sound Campaign.  This is a year-long campaign.
		It's our third one now where we work with other professional organizations, OSH professions, the National Safety Council, ASSP, AIHA, CPWR, which is construction, research and training, and NIOSH, and our Voluntary Protection Program Participants' Association -- we work with this community of people to promote safety and health programs, to provide information and guidance, very simply guidance, particularly targeted to small and medium-size businesses, to get programs started or improve the ones that they have.
		And this campaign culminates this year August 12 to 18, on Safe and Sound Week, where employers and their -- and their workers can celebrate their efforts to improve their programs or to get started with programs.  And it's really been a huge success.  This year we have over -- I'm just going to skip ahead a little bit.  We have over 200 partners, partner employers, that have signed up for the campaign and have agreed to participate.
		It is not too late to do so, if any of your organizations are interested in that.  You'll see the appropriate links to the campaign here.  We have newsletters every month to keep people informed of what's going on with the campaign.  We have a lot of resources, simple fact sheets, ways to get started with safety and health programs, basically just trying to make this not sound like such a big, scary thing, which I think a lot of small and medium-size firms may think it is.
		Our campaign does focus on three core elements of programs: management commitment; worker participation; and finding and fixing hazards.  That's kind of the core of any good safety and health program.
		So with that, I think you have the slides, you have the links to the websites.  If you have questions, you can come to Amy, you can come to me, and we'll be glad to tell you more about the campaign.  But at this point I think I'll stop and see if there are any questions.
		MR. RAFFO:  Are there any questions by the committee?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Bill, I'm just going to ask you a real quick --
		MR. PERRY:  Mm-hmm.
		MR. RAFFO:  -- question on the GHS and the data sheets.  Would the agency potentially use any chemical exposure data to I'll call it supplement, enhance areas where you don't have them in table -- in Subpart Z or Table Z?
		MR. PERRY:  For safety data sheets, you mean?
		MR. RAFFO:  Yes.
		MR. PERRY:  Well, we don't produce safety data sheets.
		MR. RAFFO:  I know you don't produce, right.
		MR. PERRY:  So -- so, you know, it's the manufacturers and importers have the responsibility to -- excuse me -- produce and update those.  So I'm not sure.  I mean, we do use our exposure data, what we gather from inspections, to inform agency initiatives, but that -- I don't think for GHS there's any particular focus on that.  We have -- the standard doesn't put emphasis on certain chemicals based on potential for exposure, if that's what you're getting at.
		MR. RAFFO:  Right, just because there are so many new chemicals that --
		MR. PERRY:  Oh, thousands and thousands.
		MR. RAFFO:  Thousands.
		MR. PERRY:  Yeah.  Yeah.  So --
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		MR. PERRY:  Yeah.
		MR. RAFFO:  That's just -- anyone else on the committee?  Any questions from the public?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you, Bill.
		MR. PERRY:  Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
		MR. RAFFO:  Appreciate it.
		MS. LEVIN:  Okay, I'm going to move that into the record.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		MS. LEVIN:  And at this time I move the PowerPoint presented by Bill Perry, Director of the Directorate of Standards and Guidance, into the docket, exhibit 44.
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you.  At this point we're pretty much on time or a little bit late.  We're scheduled to take a break now and come back at 10 o'clock.  Are we still --
		MS. LEVIN:  Of course, I think we're good.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  We have the assistant director, or assistant -- acting assistant secretary coming in at 10:00.  So we're going to take a short break.  I ask you to come back right at 10 o'clock.  Thank you.
		(A brief recess was taken.)
		MR. RAFFO:  All right, we'll come back into session, please.  I have several agendas, and the one I was reading was the wrong one.  So I think we're back on the right one, which has actually already been modified.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  So going forward, our next presentation is from Steve Butler and Laura Seeman, from the Director of Enforcement Programs.  Steve has presented and he's been here for a while.  He's presented many times and has worked with us on occasion throughout the years when I've been on the committee.  So welcome, Steve.
		MR. BUTLER:  Yes, good to be here again.  Patrick Kapust was originally scheduled, but due to an agenda change he has a 10 o'clock enforcement meeting, so he's at that.  So I'm going to try and fill in.  I probably have more in-depth knowledge specific to the programs here, shipyards and longshoring, but he was -- he was going to provide a lot of discussion on general OSHA stuff like the SVEP program and look at things agency-wide.  And I probably have about 20 percent of the knowledge spread that he has in that area, but, you know, I'll do my best to get through that.  And so let's go ahead and get started here.
		We're going to -- on the agenda, we're going to talk about walking-working surfaces.  Recently they reissued the 1910 Subpart D standards, so we'll address that a little bit, give you the -- at least give you the information as to how to define that if you need it.
		A little bit about the Field Operations Manual.  We're busy updating that at the moment, so we'll cover that.  That's basically a -- the manual that our people use out in the regions and the area offices to consistently fill out our paperwork stuff.  It tells them how to conduct investigations and how to collect information properly so that it's legal later.
		We'll do a maritime update, which will focus on the shipyard directives that were recently issued, recently being about two weeks ago.  And then we'll get into the Site-Specific Targeting Program, talk about severe injury and illness reports, and then do a review of some enforcement data so you can see how your industries compare to industries overall.
		Okay, the walking and working surfaces directive was published November 18, 2016, became effective in January of 2017.  It did have some exceptions that were in there with respect to rope descent requirements, ladder requirements and training stuff, and some -- and some of the requirements got grandfathered for existing installations, and it's primarily for things related to height and stair rail requirements.
		It became effective in May of 2017, so it's been effective for over two years now, and we obviously are continuing to update our FAQ information, frequently asked questions, because, you know, we keep getting questions as people start using the standard more frequently and gain better knowledge and start getting nervous, I guess.
		So does anybody have any questions on this particular topic, or concerns?
		(No response.)
		MR. BUTLER:  I also want to mention that when we updated Appendix A of the toolbag directive, Shipyard Toolbag Directive, we took into consideration the 1910 Subpart D requirements because a lot of them do apply to shipyards.  So that's in the appendix, so you'll be able to look it up just like any other standard to see how it's going to -- how it's being applied.
		I think I skipped something here.  Sorry, I'm not used to the -- to the three-second lag when I click the button here.
		Okay, the FOM update.  We're updating this for use by our folks.  We're kind of looking at several issues.  We have new penalty information that's gone in there, which is primarily why we started this update.
		As most of you probably know by now, Congress has authorized OSHA to update their penalties as we go along.  So, you know, before we were limited to certain limits and now those limits go up, and they're not necessarily as cut and dry as they used to be where, you know, it was like $5,000 for this and the RA could up it to 7,000.  Now it's something like, you know, $6,218 and then so on and so forth, so they've gone by percentage increases and we get some really strange numbers.  So don't be alarmed by that.  We're not picking on anyone if you see those numbers or that sort of thing.  That's just the new way it's going to go.
		As this update has evolved and other people have gotten into the review of it and making comments and so forth, the scope has expanded a little bit beyond the penalties, and it's kind of evolved into a pretty major update.  But we still expect this to be issued by the end of the fiscal year.
		Oh, there it goes.  It was right.
		Okay, the Shipyard Toolbag Directive.  The new effective date is 22 May.  So, like I said, it came out about two weeks ago.  We updated, of course, all the references that have -- a lot of them had been updated.  We, of course, went back and checked all the electronic links.  Any new references that were added, we put in their electronic links.
		So when you go in and use the directive, it's fully set up to be used more effectively online than by hard copy because you can -- you can go electronically to anything.  It's very easy to navigate.
		I had mentioned about the walking and working surfaces in 29 CFR 1919 Subpart D.  That's in there.  It took quite a while to sort out all the details, and I'd like to thank Jeremy Fuchs from my staff and Danielle Watson, who put untold hours into making sure we got this done properly and to the complete satisfaction of everybody that was involved.  So thank you profusely for that.
		We also updated a number of the interpretations that are in Appendix B of the directive, and we have approximately 50 Q&As in that appendix which pretty well covers all the questions that have come up in the past and that we anticipate in the future.  So that's been updated.
		Shipyard Confined Space Directive.  I'm often asked why do we have a toolbag directive and then on top of that, which is -- which was a one-stop shopping document as recommended by this committee.  The reason is we decided that we needed to have two emphasis directives for shipyards, one for most severe, which is confined space, and one for most frequent citations, which is PPE.  So we have a confined space directive since they are the most severe accidents that we encounter when we have them.
		Again, we updated the references and the e-links.  We have a number of flowcharts in there that start off with a flowchart about what do you do when you are at the office -- that's the first one -- and what documentation do you check.  That way the compliance officer has something to look at as a guide as to what they need to see and request from the employer, and I think it makes it easier on the employer because you as well can go in and see what we're going to be asking for before -- you know, as soon as they show up so you can start pulling that stuff.
		And then it's got one for cold checks, one for hot work, one for maintenance.  So we have real simple flowcharts to walk you through the process.  What appears to be a complicated standard without the flowcharts, when you have the flowcharts it makes it really simple.  So I encourage everyone to use those.  People that have gotten back to us that have used them have said, "Man, this really makes it easy."
		And that's part of the purpose of the toolbag directive and these two emphasis directives, is to not only help our compliance officers and give them the guidance and knowledge they need, but also to assist the action agents, which are the employers and the employees, in finding this information so that you can comply fully and easily with hopefully less consternation.
		We did update the definition for safe -- for hot work safe for workers so that it's consistent with NFPA 306, and this had to do with the oxygen-by-volume criteria.  So I think most -- the update was basically based on prior workshop -- workgroup discussions with the MACOSH shipyard group.
		PPE directive.  Again, updating all the references and e-links.  We updated the industrial head protection guidance in there because of changes to the ANSI standard, and then likewise the Coast Guard had changed their PFD requirements and associated labeling, so we went in and update that.
		In a nutshell, the old PFD standards had the type 1, type 2, type 3, and then later the type 5 requirements.  The work stuff was different than the recreational stuff.  At some point the Coast Guard decided that it would -- might be easier on the manufacturers if they just built one set of PFDs, and so they now have no difference between a PFD worn by somebody out, you know, fishing from their boat versus a worker, and they're more like A, B and C now.
		We updated the directive to make it clearer that we will accept either.  It could be 15 years from now, but if those old type 1s, type 2s, type 3s and type 5s are still in, you know, condition to be used and it still has a tag on it, we'll accept it, but we'll also obviously accept the new standard.  So we had to update all that stuff.
		And then we added a link there so you can get into OSHA's, you know, personal protective equipment webpage easily, so you've got a direct hotlink to that.
		Before I leave the maritime standards, I probably should also mention the other -- some of the other standards.  We have the -- we have the Longshoring and Marine Terminal Toolshed Directive.  It was last issued -- I believe it was July 31st of 2012.  We did review it last year.  It's still up to date as far as we can see, but if anyone here on the committee or anyone you know has any comments or recommendations for future changes, let us know.
		I had committed a number of years ago to keep the shipyard directives up to date to within five years, and we've pretty well adhered to that.  In fact, the most recent update or the last update was 2014, and we just hit the 2019 in the same month, so that was good.
		But the others I try to update as needed, so the last time we updated the toolshed directive for longshoring and marine terminals was when they came out with the new VTL standard.  Of course we waited until we got the lawsuit settled and then we updated the directive.  But if you have any changes you want to see to that, any additions, let us know.  We'd be glad to entertain those and work on that.
		We have a Commercial Diving Directive.  It's from 2011.  It's still current.  I just reviewed that with the Association of Diving Contractors International, so nothing there.  And then we have a Part 1919 directive that covers all the cranes that need to be certified, whether they're in shipyards or at marine terminals or on ships.  And the content of that directive is current but the stuff in the back that has to do with how we use our database needs to be updated.
		We have a -- we actually issue electronic forms and have since January of 2009, so it's over 12 -- or over 10 years now.  And, you know, so, you know, we have to give guidance to our folks on how to access that data and information and how to use it.  We can actually go in and see the status of all of the cranes nationwide in real time.
		So that's a very useful tool for us.  We have an actual active database.  The inputs to that database are made by private sector employee -- employers who are accredited by the agency to go out and issue the certifications.  They do the inputs, we do the review and operate the database and generate the reports for the field offices.  So we have that going on.
		Any immediate questions with respect to directives?  No?
		(No response.)
		MR. BUTLER:  Okay, now for site-specific targeting I'm going to let Laura Seeman, who works for Patrick, to kind of walk you through the site-specific targeting information.
		MS. SEEMAN:  Thanks, Steve.  Hi, everyone.  I'm Laura Seeman and I'm with the Office of the Director -- of the Director in Enforcement Programs.
		The Site-Specific Targeting Program was launched in October of 2018.  For those of you that have been around for a little while, you might have recognized the program.  We had several years of site-specific targeting in prior years.  However, the previous programs were based on the OSHA Data Initiative, and the current program that we have is based on the revised recordkeeping regulations that require electronic submittal of injury and illness information from the 300A forms.
		So we now have data from 2016, calendar year 2017 and 2018.  The current program that's active right now is using the 2016 data.  We have a mix of manufacturing and non-manufacturing sites.  We have high-rate sites, but we also have a small number of low-rate sites just for quality control, and we also have a representative sampling of non-responders as well.  Next slide.
		So that leads to the injury tracking application, which is the data system that's available to the public on our website where we collect the data, where employers are required to submit.  As I said, we now have 2016, `17 and `18, and moving forward we're going to be developing the program that will launch in October of this year, and we'll be using a combination of the data from `16, `17 and `18 to see if we can see trending through the three years, and again, we're looking at high-rate sites as well.
		There are some rule changes.  We have a rule that's out that does have some changes.  I'll be honest with you, this is not my area of expertise.  This is tech support and emergency management.  But just to be aware, there is a regulation that's out there that's been proposed that would change some of the original requirements.  For example, we're no longer requiring the Form 301 or the Form 300, just the 300A data.
		Yeah.  Did we take this?
		MR. BUTLER:  I'm just going to let you, but I can do it.
		MS. SEEMAN:  Okay.
		MR. BUTLER:  I can do it.  Okay, we have a program called Rapid Response Investigation.  It's something where we try to collaborate with our field folks, take a problem, solving an approach to it.  And we do -- we try to invite the employer in to talk with our area office folks and try to work together to achieve a common goal, which is improved safety, and they have highlighted there on the slide that the ultimate goal is to find and fix hazards and improve safety overall.
		This is one of those approaches where we think it's better to actually work with the employer if -- where possible, instead of getting into a more adversarial sort of role and situation, which we think we do better overall if we can do this.  It's a relatively new program, and we have -- we think we've had good success so far and think we're going to have additional, further success moving forward.
		Has anybody here been involved in an RRI?  No?
		(No response.)
		MR. BUTLER:  I can never tell when this thing -- there it goes.  Okay.
		Here are some slides on severe injury reporting from calendar years `15 through calendar year 2019.  These are -- the current year, the current percentage, that obviously will change.  But it gives you some idea as to the fact that, you know, we're doing more RRIs and fewer of the traditional inspections.  We've went from 31 down to 27, 25, bumped up to 27 but now we're at 24.  So the general trend is to the right.  So if you -- and if you take it on a three-year trend line, it is a continual right-handed slope.
		So and then for amputations the same thing, so even for the more serious type -- types of injuries related to amputations, we see the same general trend where we have a right-handed slope over a five-year period.  So that's been positive.
		Let's go into -- we looked at data from 2015 to the current year.  This gives you an idea on the number of inspections.  Our inspections conducted has went down recently from almost 36,000, and last year we were basically at 32,000.  So, you know, you can do the math there.  That's about -- that's about a 12 and a half, 13 percent drop.
		But -- and this year, although it looks low, we're probably going to end up right around 32,000 when it's all said and done.  We're coming in to the part of the year when we do more inspections than we do in other quarters.  It's in the fourth quarter.  The weather is generally better across all the states, which helps a lot, and that's just the way it is.
		So -- yeah, so that's the general trend for inspections, all inspections.  This is not specific to the maritime industries.  This is how many inspections we do in a year.
		Get this thing to move on.
		MS. SEEMAN:  They also trended the maritime inspections as well.
		MR. BUTLER:  Yeah, they do have the maritime inspections on there.  You can see -- so there -- but there's no delineation between shipyard and longshoring.  It's just all of the ones that were done.  But it runs pretty consistent.  There we go.
		Okay, here's violations issued.  So it gives you an idea.  You know, 65,000 violations in `15.  You know, last year they were down to 51, so there was a drop there.  Relatively consistent the last three years.  This year, right now we're at 33,000 and I think this data was as of the end of April.  So I think we're going to make -- we're going to probably exceed last year by the time all is said and done.  But this gives you an idea on the number of actual violations that were identified.
		And in the maritime industries, down from 800 to into the 500 range.  I think it's going to -- that's probably going to end up about the same this year.  So we'll see how it ends up for `19, but that gives you an idea of the number of violations in all industries, whether it's shipyards, longshoring or marine terminals.
		Percent of inspections in compliance, national versus maritime -- as a general rule, maritime has done better recently, but oh, and here's Patrick Kapust.  You want to --
		MR. KAPUST:  You can continue.
		MR. BUTLER:  Continue?  Generally speaking, maritime does a little bit better than industries as a whole for being in compliance.  This considers all worksites, every factory, every construction site, et cetera.  So this gives you an idea of what's involved there.
		Let's go to -- and here's a slide that talks about the percent of total violations issued as serious.  I'm looking at 2015, you know, through current year.  Again, seem to be doing a little bit better with the serious violations than industry as a whole.  I'm not sure what drives the other industries higher.  Is that mainly construction?
		MR. KAPUST:  No, typically we like to -- we like to have -- see that number, and as you can see, it's fairly consistent throughout -- throughout the years.  It indicates that we are finding serious hazards at the workplace.  So when we look -- when we look for targeting and so forth, we want to make sure we are targeting high-hazard workplaces.
		MR. BUTLER:  You want to talk about that one?
		MR. KAPUST:  Sure.  For penalties, as you can see, the penalties have increased over -- over time.  That's mainly due to the Inflation Adjustment Act for the average serious violation.  Maritime I guess -- I guess the reason why maritime is a little bit higher is because it's larger employers, so you do not do with -- deal with the penalty reduction for the employer size.
		MR. BUTLER:  We also had those SIP cases last year.
		MR. KAPUST:  Right, but for FY to date, yeah.
		MR. BUTLER:  Right, for `18.
		MR. KAPUST:  Yeah.
		MR. BUTLER:  Yeah.
		MR. KAPUST:  Okay.  Okay, go ahead.  That's it.  And by the way, my name is Patrick Kapust.  Sorry there was some confusion about the time I was on.  I was at -- I had another meeting at 10 o'clock, but I'm the Acting Director of Enforcement Programs.
		Yes, sir.
		MR. RAFFO:  Quick question.  Our industry is somewhat unique compared to, you know, general industry and construction, and I think one of the struggles that our industry has is when your inspectors come in, and I think you can see this by your numbers, is that they're not really totally familiar with maritime standards, maritime issues.  I'll talk on the -- at least on the shipyard side.
		You know, so if this committee could be of any help to providing any information and help documentation to your inspectors going into maritime facilities, you know, I think we'd be more than happy to help.  But a lot of times, you know, one particular issue is confined spaces; the confined space standard in the maritime industry is fairly significantly different than the general industry or construction standards.
		And, you know, when you're doing 20,000-some inspections in general industry and construction and a couple hundred in maritime, you know, for an inspector to be knowledgeable in our industry I understand is very difficult, but if we can be of any help going forward to sort of alleviate any struggles on both sides of the equation, I think this group would be more than happy to help you.
		MR. KAPUST:  Certainly, we would -- we would appreciate that.
		Go ahead.
		MR. BUTLER:  Yeah, I was going to say, you know, I talked earlier when I was talking about the directives, and any input you guys or insight you can give us on how to make those directives improve, because the primary purpose of the directives is as a knowledge base and as reference for the compliance officer, even though, unlike other industries, in maritime we also try to put stuff in there that is for the employers and the employees, and you can -- you can see that because there's a lot of stuff in there that is of no use to an inspector.
		But anything you can give us along those lines.  We've tried to use the maritime directive program as a way to capture knowledge for them because we realize we just can't go out and hire people specifically to do maritime stuff.  Occasionally we hire an ex-Coast Guard officer or something like that, or maybe -- maybe a Naval Academy graduate, but --
		(Laughter.)
		MR. CROW:  Go figure.
		MR. BUTLER:  Yeah.  But, you know, that's -- that's a hit-and-miss thing.  It's not consistent.  So our consistency comes from those directives, so any -- any input we can get at all from this committee or anyone that works for you or in that industry sector is greatly appreciated.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  You know, I understand your struggle with your -- you know, within your -- both your personnel and in budget constraints and, you know, overall we're a small chunk of the overall industry in the U.S., so it makes it sometimes frustrating on our side when we're trying to answer something and we're telling the inspector, "You've got the wrong standard."  And so, you know, once again, we'll take it under consideration.  So thank you.
		Any --
		MR. TURNER:  I had a question.  So going back to the slides on the average cost of a citation, I'm noticing that the number of serious citations in the maritime industry is less than general industry.  However, the average amount for the fine is higher.  Can you explain that?  I'm -- I had -- I might have missed that a little bit of why that might be.
		MR. KAPUST:  Two -- two possible things.  It is, as you said, there was a -- an egregious case that might have skewed the numbers -- numbers off a little bit.  Secondly is when we do inspections in maritime, it could be we're dealing with larger employers who would not qualify for the higher reductions for size.  Because we give a penalty reduction of up to 70 percent for size, if it's less than 10 employees.  If it's mostly larger employers that we're doing, obviously they're not going to -- if it's over 100 -- 250, they wouldn't qualify for any penalty reduction.
		MR. TURNER:  Thank you.
		MR. RAFFO:  Any other questions?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you very much for your presentation.
		MR. BUTLER:  Yeah.
		MR. RAFFO:  Appreciate it.
		PARTICIPANT:  Can you take questions from the audience?
		MR. RAFFO:  Yes.  I'm sorry, I should have mentioned that.
		PARTICIPANT:  Thanks.  Several of the slides at the beginning mentioned guidance documents.  It's my understanding that there's a DOL-wide -- which I'm assuming is going to include OSHA -- audit of interpretations and guidance documents from -- I forget the date range -- `13 to `16 I think.  Do you anticipate this audit to include any of the maritime guidance documents?  Do you think --
		MR. KAPUST:  The audit is basically for, yeah, all of -- all of DOL and OSHA.  The guidance documents that were mentioned at the beginning of this presentation and that I'm assuming you're talking about are -- it's enforcement guidance for our field.  So it's directing our field on how to conduct compliance inspections at the -- at the establishments, particularly if it's -- like we're working on one for walking-working surfaces, the standard that just got promulgated a couple years ago.
		So it would be for -- you know, that's -- that's the audience.  However, employers do use those documents to help them ensure compliance, but the audience is our field, and those documents cannot create any new regulation or any new requirements, which is telling our COSHOs how to conduct those inspections.  Yeah.
		PARTICIPANT:  We do read them.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. KAPUST:  Ah, good.
		PARTICIPANT:  Do you think the FOM will also be pushed back by this audit?  Or --
		MR. KAPUST:  No, we're currently working to update -- to update the FOM.
		PARTICIPANT:  Okay.
		MR. KAPUST:  Which goes -- by the way, which goes through a full concurrence process within the agency as well as the solicitors.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Ray Benavente, ILWU.  So I saw in one of the slides you said inspections are down, but you kind of sort of answered the question later on in a later part of your presentation.  I think it may have been in personnel or staff, and it's mainly to the maritime.  So I was wondering why the inspections are down.  Is that because of the personnel or budget cut, or why would that --
		MR. KAPUST:  Yeah, actually inspections have sort of leveled off over the last three years.  We're roughly at about 32,000 inspections over the last -- if we can pull up that slide.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Yeah, there it is.
		MR. KAPUST:  It should be the one right before that.  Yeah, 32,000 inspections, roughly, for the last -- last three years.  And since we're not done with FY19 yet, that's why that number is lower.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Okay.
		MR. KAPUST:  But that number does reflect the -- we -- if you looked at the -- if you put this chart out, like, back to Fiscal Year, you know, `11 or something like that, yeah, there were -- there were higher inspections.  We did have more compliance officers at that time.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Okay.  So would those be mandatory or scheduled inspections, or an inspection --
		MR. KAPUST:  No.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  -- because of an injury or some -- can you kind of explain that?
		MR. KAPUST:  Sure.  Those are all inspections.  Those aren't -- we do conduct what we call programmed versus un-programmed inspections.
		PARTICIPANT:  Do you mind talking into the mic?  Thank you.
		MR. KAPUST:  Sure.  We do -- we do what you call un-programmed and programmed inspections.  Programmed inspections are those where we have, like, emphasis programs such as for amputations, shipbreaking, where we say we're going to go out and we're going to target this particular industry or this particular hazard.
		For un-programmed inspections, though, those could be related to events.  For example, Steve probably went through the severe injury data.  We do respond to severe injuries that we receive: the loss of an eye, loss of an -- an amputation or a hospitalization.  Now, whether we do an inspection of those, I think he said we went through a triage process.
		But some inspections we are -- we must do.  We must do an inspection for fatalities.  We go out and we do inspections for imminent danger.  If we receive a complaint from an employer or an employee representative, we'll go out and do an inspection of that as well, or a referral from another governmental agency could trigger an inspection.
		So there's that programmed versus un-programmed activity, and I don't know whether there -- I don't think there was a slide in here, but if you looked at our programmed activity versus our un-programmed activity, i.e. those we're targeting to get to or those events -- those events or reports that we're responding to, our un-programmed activity has overtaken our programmed activity.  So roughly 54, 55 percent of our inspections are un-programmed whereas a few years back it was the opposite, it was we were doing more programmed inspections.
		Why that changed is greatly due to the severe injury reports that we receive, and I think from the data it says we receive about 12,000 of those and we do roughly, you know, three or four thousand inspections per year.  If we were to do all of those -- and we do roughly 32,000 inspections a year -- almost our -- that shift from programmed to un-programmed would be even greater.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  So with the -- with the -- is this -- or with the programmed inspections targeting specific issues, yeah.  So is that a result of complaints to your agency?  How -- you're talking about a specific issue, whether it be at a maritime terminal or whatever.  So how would those be generated or how the --
		MR. KAPUST:  Sure.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  How would that happen?
		MR. KAPUST:  Programmed inspections, we usually either -- we're either targeting a hazard or we're targeting a high-hazard industry, okay?  And we go through it, we look at data, we look at our enforcement data, we look at injury and illness data, and we develop a targeting system for that particular hazard or that particular -- that particular industry.
		Shipbreaking is an example.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Sorry, but yeah, that would be my thought.  Was that -- specifically, would it be because of complaints by workers?
		MR. KAPUST:  Not necessarily.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  How would --
		MR. KAPUST:  Right, not necessarily, not necessarily complaints.  It could be, as I say, we're looking at -- we're looking at our severe injury data or just the Bureau of Labor statistics data.  Possibly, sometimes we are able to look not necessarily nationally but within individual regions.  They can sometimes get workers comp data.
		But usually it's data-driven rather than complaint-driven, unless, of course, you get to those areas where you have let's say a low rate but high consequence events -- for example, in process safety management, when dealing with chemicals, they may have low rates, injury and illness rates.  However, when something happens, when you get an event, it's a catastrophic event and you get multiple fatalities.
		But no, complaints aren't necessarily a driver.  If we were to receive a complaint, though, on a particular activity that had a particular injury or addressing a certain hazard where we do have an emphasis program, we are -- that would be included in that inspection as well.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  So just finally, I just -- so in southern California, and I wanted to ask about the -- I guess the staff there.  We were -- I was just -- it just seemed like there was an issue trying to get one of the OSHA reps out there.  So is that -- again, would that be staffing or budget or just because there aren't people familiar with the maritime industry that you can't make available?
		MR. KAPUST:  No, I mean, I'm -- in California we do have folks who are -- know maritime, so I don't know.  Again, we'd have to talk offline about any specific incident that may have occurred in California.
		MR. BENAVENTE:  Perfect, thank you.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, thank you.  I'm going to have to unfortunately cut off questions because we're running a little behind time.  So thank you very much for your stopping down.  Thank you much for your presentation.  If anyone from the public has any questions later, maybe you can take them offline.
		But we are going to move right on now into our next presentation from Annette Braam, the Assistant Director of Training and Education.
		MS. WANGDAHL:  As Annette -- as Annette is coming up, I just want to let the committee know that this is a project that came to her office just a few months ago.  So sometimes the agency will come to the committee with an assignment, and this is one of those instances.  She will be in the workgroups, both workgroups this afternoon to answer any questions, and we have some follow-up discussion.  But I wanted her to at least present in front of the full committee before we get started.
		MS. BRAAM:  Hi.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  I'm so happy to be able to be here today, and I am -- I want to speak to you about OSHA's external training programs and how we reach workers both in the maritime industry and all of our industries, and also what we can do in the future to expand those educational opportunities to the maritime community.
		I appreciate the promotion to Assistant Director of Training and -- of Director of Training and Education, but I work for the Directorate of Training and Education and I am the Assistant Director for their external training programs.
		So if you've ever heard of DTE before, we provide education and training to the -- both the compliance assistance, OSHA staff and the public.
		Oh, I have to do two things at the same time; I wasn't paying attention.
		So our three offices are the -- first, the OSHA Training Institute.  The office -- we have the Office of Training and Educational Development and the Office of Training Programs and Administration.  Maybe --
		MR. RAFFO:  Can you point that over there?
		MS. BRAAM:  This way?
		MR. RAFFO:  Yeah.
		MS. BRAAM:  Ah, thank you.  The OSHA Training Institute trains federal and state compliance officers, consultants, whistleblower investigators and OSHA professional and technical support personnel.  They offer over 50 different technical courses, and their courses are enforcement and compliance-based.
		They -- this year they wanted you to know that they're going to be offering two of the OTI maritime courses for OSHA's staff, both the longshoring and marine terminal processes and standards course and the shipyard employment course.
		The Office of Training and Educational Development designs and develops courses and training materials for the OTI.  They do this in classroom training.  They do blended classroom, which is part online and part in the classroom, and they develop webinars.  They also develop and assist with developing curriculum for the OSHA Training Institute Education Centers, and they work with alliances and partnerships on helping with development of specific curriculum.
		The Training Programs Office, which is my office, we have the OSHA Training Institute Education Centers Program, the Outreach Training Program and the Susan Harwood Training Grants Program.
		A little bit about the Susan Harwood Training Grants Program.  We this year have three funding opportunity announcements presently out.  One is capacity building.  This is where you can receive the first year of funding with the potential for three additional years of funding, and it is meant to develop safety and health training programs, and the expectation is that at the end of that four years of funding that you will be self-sufficient in that specific program that you developed.
		We also have targeted topic training, which is based on a set number of topics that OSHA specifies, and it is based on injury and fatality rates, emphasis programs, and that is to train what we consider hard-to-reach workers and high-hazard areas.
		And then the last is training materials development, and that is to develop training material packets, packages, in specific subjects or industries and which will eventually be put onto OSHA's website so that anyone in those industries can use those materials.  To be eligible you have to be a nonprofit organization or a publicly supported college or university.  And this year we have $10.5 million available, and the application closes on July 2nd.
		The -- one of the great things about this, the Harwood Program, is that all of the materials that are developed by the grantees are put onto OSHA's website for use by anyone.  So right now we have over 600 training packages.  This includes instructor guides, student manuals, PowerPoints, tests, activities, some videos, and all of these materials are put up on OSHA's website and they're free for anyone to download for an employer to utilize in their workplace.
		So these are materials that continue to live on and they're available in multi-languages, and I put the website down there so that if you have not ever been on that site, I would recommend it.  In fact, some of the materials that we have for the maritime industry include slips, trips and falls for the commercial fisheries, safety and health management programs in the shipyard industry, safe shipyard practices, maritime training and injury prevention.
		The OSHA Training Institute Education Centers, this is -- this is not the same as the OTI, which I mentioned earlier.  Once again, the OTI teaches our compliance officers and is enforcement-based where our OTI Education Centers teach the private and public sector and other federal agencies and this is standards and best practices-based courses.
		So this is a national network of nonprofit organizations, and we have 26 OTI Education Centers comprised of 39 member organizations.  They are located all across the country, and we have at least one in every OSHA -- of OSHA's 10 regions, and they receive no federal funding so they must be self-sufficient.  They're authorized by OSHA to teach OSHA's courses.
		And then as an addition, they also may have host training sites, and this becomes important when we discuss a little bit about the maritime industry because the Education Center, they may be located in North Carolina but they are expected -- the expectation is that they will teach throughout their entire region.  So they will have host sites that will allow the Education Centers to offer those courses.
		And last year we -- the Education Center, OTI Education Center, celebrated 25 years since its inception in 1992.  We offer over 50 courses in construction, general and maritime industries, and we have three specific maritime courses: our maritime standards courses, our train the trainer outreach course and our update trainer course.  We -- also, the Education Centers will do contract classes which may be appropriate for your industry.
		Last year we trained over 55,000 students and conducted over 4,500 classes, and this was an all-time high for us.  And as an aside, some of the courses that also may be appropriate for maritime is we have a new one-day silica course for construction, general and maritime industries.  We also have an electrical standards course, and we have health hazard awareness courses, and this is one of the things that I will discuss with you in a little bit about how you all may be able to help us with some of that.
		We know that the maritime industry, from an educational standpoint, has been underserved and we've been looking at this for the last few years of what can we do to improve -- to improve this.  So you can see here from 2014 to 2018, the three course -- the three main maritime courses, how many have been offered.  And for your reference, the 5410 is the standards course and then the 5400 is the trainer course and the 5402 is the update course.
		And then we look -- so we looked at those three courses and in 2018 we had -- we trained over 26,000 students in construction, general and maritime for those three -- three subject areas, so the construction standards course, the general industries standards course and the maritime course.
		So we trained over 26,000 students.  Only 431 of those were maritime students.  That's only 1.6 percent of the total students for just those three courses.  And we have many more students that are trained in the standards course, which our standards courses, to us, this is a great way to start if you're new in the occupational safety and health field in particular, to start with our standards courses, but it also is a prerequisite to be able to become an outreach trainer.
		And our number of outreach trainers, that number is lower, significantly lower, and as we look at that, one of the concerns is that we believe the reason why we have such a lower number of outreach trainers is because they don't have the five years of safety-related experience in the maritime industry that they need to have in order to move forward after the standards course and become an outreach trainer.
		This next slide is -- I'm not going to discuss.  It's really just for you to be able to have some more information when you're looking at how those numbers fall out from 2015 to 2018, and this is the number of students trained and the number of courses conducted.
		So we went to our OTI Education Center community and -- about 18 months ago and asked them, so where are we falling short?  How we've -- as I said, we've been discussing this for quite a long time within our Education Center community and within OSHA.  And so we asked them very specific questions, and we asked about were the Education Centers offering maritime courses.  If they're offering the courses, are they -- are the canceled?  Do you have to cancel them?  Is there low enrollment?
		As I mentioned earlier, the Education Centers are self-sufficient, so if they cannot fill a classroom, have a specific number of students, then they tend to have to cancel the course.  Are there other courses that are relevant to the maritime industry being offered?  Do they have house sites or offer classes in the maritime industry locations?  And if not, have they tried and been unsuccessful?  And then, what can we do to promote maritime training?
		Our Education Centers are the ones who are out there in the community, they're talking to the groups, they're trying to find out, so we felt like they were a great group for us to look at.
		So out of those 39 organizations, only 12 are actually offering maritime classes.  Many of them stated that they've tried to offer them in the past and have had no success, so they have not been teaching them.  Out of those, 11 offer open enrollment courses, which means we have one Education Center that really only does it as a contract class, if the industry comes to them or a company comes to them and asks them to specifically offer the maritime courses.  And of those 12, seven have had to cancel for low enrollment or no enrollment.
		Once again, the enrollment is higher in the standards course and the outreach trainer course, and once again, we feel that's because of they -- they expressed that when individuals come to them to become an outreach trainer that they don't have the five years of safety-related experience.
		We don't have any Education Centers right now that are offering courses that may relate to maritime, in the maritime industry, and that they've had limited success in trying to develop host sites or locations that would allow them to teach the courses.
		And we'll get back to the Education Centers in a minute, but the outreach training program, many of you probably know this as the 10 and 30-hour class.  It's a hazard recognition and prevention program, and it's 10 or 30 hours.  We have it for construction, general and maritime industries, and we also have a seven-and-a-half and a 15-hour disaster site worker program.
		The outreach training program is a voluntary program.  It's not a certification.  It's not a license, which we hear all the time.  OSHA is not a certifying body or a licensing body.  It's a voluntary program.  It does not meet any of the requirements for training within the OSHA standards, so it cannot be used as a replacement for that required training.
		Right now we have over 37,000 authorized trainers; 578 of them as of last week are maritime outreach trainers.  That's just 1.5 percent of all of our authorized outreach trainers.  And in FY2018, we trained over a million workers in this program.  So it's an awesome program, but it's a voluntary program.  Now, we do have some states and some cities who have put it into their statutes and made it a requirement, but it's not OSHA's requirement.
		So when we look at the outreach training program, and if you look at this graph, the maritime is small.  We trained in FY2018 over -- as I stated earlier, over a million workers and employers in this program, and 17,765 of those were maritime.  It's about 1.6 percent of the total outreach training.
		And I'm not going to once again go over this slide with you.  This is so that you have some more information on numbers as we talk further about our needs.
		So what can we do?  And looking at how do we expand the maritime training opportunities, the first thing is the OTI Education Centers, we would like to take the 5410, which is the standards course -- presently it covers marine terminals, shipyard employment and longshoring.
		And when we go back -- and all of our students are evaluate -- conduct an evaluation of the course when they finish, and one of the things that they've talked about is longshoring doesn't -- I don't need longshoring if I'm in shipyard employment, or vice versa.  I may not need this entire week of this course.  And so we'd like to split it into two different courses: marine terminals and longshoring, and shipyard employment.
		We also want to determine which of our existing Education Center courses may be appropriate for the maritime industry.  I mentioned earlier we have the electrical standards course, and the Navy in particular requires that of some of their employees have to have our electrical standards course.  We have health hazards.  We have lock-out, tag-out.  We have hazardous materials.  We are in the process of looking at updating our false protection standards course, and when we update that we're going to -- it's been mainly a construction course but we're going to include general industry and maritime into that course as we update it.
		We potentially may want to look at developing a maritime certificate program.  Many of our Education Centers, they have certificate programs.  We have one in particular for public sector workers that is across the entire Education Center community, so maybe this is something that would help with, in particular, focusing on those individuals who have started off in the safety environment.  I'm sure many of you yourself may have experienced that today you're told you're now the safety person for your company, and you come to us and ask us, "What do I do next?"  So maybe if we had some way to provide some of those training that as they get experience they will also get the education to build their skills and knowledge.
		We -- how do we outreach to the maritime community?  The Education Centers have expressed their concern with that it's been much -- it's been rather difficult to get into the maritime industry community, that it's been a closed community, and that they want to know and how can we -- can we develop some partnerships across the industry?  How do we develop a communication plan that would be specific for maritime?  How can we do that?  And that is an area that we really feel that we look down the road at needing some guidance from the maritime communities.  How can we reach out?
		Also, the outreach training program -- we know that when we make changes to the standards course that we need to look at -- after that we need to look at the trainer course.  We're not necessarily intending on making any changes because it's a train the trainer course, and it's providing guidance and training and education on how to educate adults and using adult learning principles on how to develop curriculum and those kinds of things.
		But we know that we'll have some challenges that we'll need to look at in the future as far as if you're an outreach trainer, are you an outreach trainer just for longshoring?  Are you an outreach trainer just for marine terminals?  How -- and that is something that we know we need to look at.
		Also, looking at down the road having the -- outreach trainers are required to develop their own materials and to make it specific to the hazards in their workplace.  That's how this program is based.  But we do have some materials that have been developed for general industry and for construction that trainers can use if they'd like.  It's as an elective.  We don't have those for maritime, and so that is something else that down the road we would like to be able to look at.
		So we -- kind of what -- we would like to have a long-term plan for how do we reach this industry and believe that all of you would be able to provide us with some assistance.
		So the ask is, one, that you would consider taking -- as a project, taking the OSHA 5410 and splitting it into two different courses.  We have -- I have brought with me the learning and enabling objectives.  We have the existing materials, which you would be welcome to have and potentially use or update.  That would be one of the things.
		And the second is that I've brought -- we've brought the course -- our course catalog and would like you to look at that catalog, look at all of our courses and the course descriptions, and determine if any of those courses can be used -- utilized in the maritime industry as they exist today or that you can give us some guidance in saying, "You know what?  This is a course that would be great if you had a module that had some specific things in," and we can look at that down the road.
		And from that information, that would help us in determining whether or not we have something that the Education Centers could develop a certificate program off of.  And it also will help us help the Education Centers in marketing those specific courses.  Because, as I mentioned earlier, they're not doing that right now, and so -- but if they knew, "Oh, you know what?  This electrical course would be great in maritime," they can -- they can utilize that in their efforts to reach the community.
		Any questions?
		MR. RAFFO:  Any questions from the committee?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  I'm just going to make a couple of observations.  One, I think with the level of expertise in this room on this committee that we can certainly be of some help to you.
		MS. BRAAM:  Excellent.
		MR. RAFFO:  Number two, my personal opinion, I think the feedback you got from your students about separating the different maritime industries is right on.  We're fairly different.
		MS. BRAAM:  Yes, sir.
		MR. RAFFO:  We have different safety issues, different policies, practices, procedures as we go forward.  So I think that's a good point and I also think that even -- you may even -- since our industry is so small, so specific, rather than bringing in maritime in fall protection or general industry courses, maybe just set it -- separate it out and bring it into the fold of training on longshoring or shipyards and just pull it right out and include it in the course.  But that's my personal opinion and, you know, we can work that through our committees.
		But I appreciate your coming to us.  I think it's sort of a good topic for us and I think a lot of the feedback I've heard on the program is what you've heard, and so I think we can hopefully help you on that.  So, thank you.
		MS. BRAAM:  Thank you.  Thank you.
		MR. RAFFO:  Once again, any other questions?  Amy?
		MS. LIU:  Thanks.  I happen to be one of the outreach trainers in the Pacific Northwest, and so I'm particularly excited about this project and being able to really make an impact and help workers.  So thank you very much for bringing this to us.
		MS. BRAAM:  Well, and thank you for being one of our trainers.  That's really awesome.
		MR. RAFFO:  Any other questions from the committee?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  We got a couple minutes.  Any quick questions from audience?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, hearing none we will move on.  Thank you very much for your presentation.
		MS. BRAAM:  Thank you.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, we will move right on into our next presentation, which is with Loren Sweatt, the Acting Assistant Secretary.  She'll give us a talk about OSHA activities update, which, I believe, will be followed by a picture at a preselected location.  So, welcome.
		MS. SWEATT:  I think what we're going to do is reverse it because I think you all need a movement break, and so we're going to do that.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		MS. SWEATT:  And our photographer is here and then I will get you back on schedule.  So --
		MR. RAFFO:  All right, so you want us to what, follow you or follow --
		MS. SWEATT:  I think Bill's got an idea of what he wants to do.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, follow --
		MS. SWEATT:  So, yeah.
		(A brief recess was taken.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Should we wait a minute until --
		MS. LEVIN:  That's the problem with the movement breaks, those people --
		MR. RAFFO:  Right, they move.
		MS. LEVIN:  Yeah.
		(Laughter.)
		MS. LEVIN:  They're not like a captive audience.
		MR. RAFFO:  Yeah, one minute.
		MS. SWEATT:  I don't have anything else I --
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		MS. SWEATT:  Yeah.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  I see Robert out there.  Okay, we'll go back in session where we left off.  So, welcome.
		MS. SWEATT:  Thank you.  Good morning.  It's almost after noon, although you can't tell without the windows.  It's my great pleasure to be with you today for the first MACOSH meeting of the new charter.  Welcome back to the returning members and greetings for the -- those that are new.
		OSHA is pleased to have so many experienced members serving on the committee.  Thank you for agreeing to this important and impactful committee.  I look forward to seeing the recommendations that you develop from all your hard work.
		As you all know, OSHA's goal is for every worker to go home safe and healthy at the end of each day.  The agency is committed to maintaining a balanced approach to reaching that goal through compliance assistance and enforcement.  Under Secretary Acosta's leadership, the department is committed to fully and fairly enforcing the laws under its jurisdiction.  The vast majority of employers strive to keep their workplaces safe and OSHA is working to give employers and employees the knowledge and tools they need to comply with their obligations to stay safe.
		OSHA currently has eight local or regional emphasis programs for the maritime industry.  Through these programs, we are focusing on those most prevalent hazards.  OSHA also began enforcing the silica standard in the maritime industry last June, and we have a wide range of compliance assistance materials including a small entity compliance guideline for maritime.
		Employers who want to help do the right thing can take advantage of OSHA's cooperative programs including the onsite consultation program aimed at small employers who may not have the same resources as larger ones.  This is all part of the balanced approach that OSHA is taking to address workplace safety and health.
		Enforcement and compliance assistance are not mutually exclusive.  In fact, they are complementary.  The overriding principle is worker protection.  OSHA's initiatives are also aimed at raising awareness of prevalent hazards and ways to stay safe.  Last month I was joined by more than 1,600 workers, employers and other stakeholders at the site of the new Texas Rangers stadium in Arlington, Texas, to kick off the sixth annual National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls.  Throughout the week employers hosted more than 1,800 events in all 50 states, educating workers across the nation by discussing how to prevent fall injuries and demonstrating preventive safety techniques.
		Since OSHA began this campaign six years ago, nearly 10 million workers have been reached through stand-down events.  As we head into the heat of the summer, heat illness is another hazard that affects many industries including the maritime industry.  It is important to educate employers and workers about the dangers of working in heat, indoors and out.  Our safety message comes down to three key words: water, rest, shade.
		The Safe and Sound Campaign reinforces the importance of safety and health programs.  For those of you who have participated in previous years, I thank you very much.  I hope that you will join us on the event this year, which is scheduled for August 12th through the 18th.
		Finally, I'd like to briefly discuss the issue of suicide prevention.  Suicide is a serious public health problem that can have lasting harmful effects on individuals, families, workplaces and communities.  The agency is looking at ways to work with our federal agency partners and stakeholders to help shed light on this problem and find ways to help prevent these terrible incidents from happening.
		OSHA has created a new webpage with resources to help employers and workers identify the warning signs and know how and who to call for help.  I hope that these will be useful for your industry as well.  It's mainly aimed at the construction side, which is seeing a 20 percent increase in this problem, but I think the resources can go across the industries.
		Thank you again for volunteering your time to participate in this committee.  The work you do will go a long way towards improving the safety and health of workers in the maritime industry.  Working together, we can tackle the issues facing this industry.  Worker lives and livelihoods depend on our ability to help prevent injuries and illnesses.  Let's do all we can to send every worker home safe and healthy at the end of each day.
		Thank you and, apparently, we're going to have questions.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Any questions from the committee, comments, thoughts?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  I just want to personally thank you for all the work.  I've already talked -- mentioned it to Bill Perry and Amy.  I know it was a lot of work to get us re-chartered, so we appreciate that, so thank you.  Also, with the level of expertise and the varied interests on our committee, I think we're all here for one purpose: to reduce injuries and, you know, with the goal of elimination of injuries and fatalities in our industry.  So we will all be working hard and working together to try to obtain that goal.
		So, once again, I just wanted to say thank you.
		MS. SWEATT:  Great, thanks.  We have a great team.  Amy leading this for you all, I think it'll be a great couple of years.
		MR. RAFFO:  I do too.  Thank you.  Any questions from the -- comments?  Any questions, comments from the public?
		(No response.)
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, we're a quiet group I guess.
		(Laughter.)
		MS. SWEATT:  I'm really surprised.
		MR. RAFFO:  Yes.  Thank you very much.
		MS. SWEATT:  Great.  Thank you all.  Have a great couple of days here.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay, thank you.  Okay, we're going to take one quick minute for some procedural issues from Jennifer.
		MS. LEVIN:  Okay, at this time I'm moving into the docket as exhibit 45 the PowerPoint presentation by the Directorate of Enforcement Programs, and exhibit 46, the presentation by the Directorate of Training and Education, external training programs.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.  Thank you, Jennifer.  Okay.  So we're slightly ahead of schedule today so we will probably take a slightly earlier lunch break.  We will probably come back slightly earlier from lunch and maybe get you out of here slightly earlier today.  So that will be our goal today.
		I -- one thing that Jim Thornton did at the end of our meetings -- and, once again, our meetings are reversed and this is an early one -- but one thing that he did that I sort of liked is he went around the table for the committee and just asked for any thoughts, comments -- if you don't have anything, that's fine -- from each individual member, just recognize each individual member and went around the room.
		So I'd like to continue that thought process, that opportunity, and just go around the room and get any thoughts, comments, ideas from each member, and I'm going to put Bill on the spot as the first person.
		MR. CROW:  Being the newbie, so I'm still getting -- I'm way wet behind the ears, but some of the things that were discussed this morning are things that I think have been percolating at least down in the Hampton Roads area with the ship-repair industry that's down there.  I mean, we've got 291 member companies, and some of the things that we mentioned here, which is we found out very early on that if you go to that -- the standards course, you're wasting three of your days as a ship-repairer or shipbuilder to -- and you go and you don't get anything out of it.
		So we've provided that feedback to our area director and he provided it to the region, and I guess the region has -- you know, it's being discussed now and it's also been in feedback.  I would tell you that would be huge for industry because it saves time, it saves money, it saves effort and it keeps people in the production seats instead of, you know, having to spend three extra days for not a lot of value added in regards to what they're doing.  So I thought that was absolutely fabulous.
		MR. RAFFO:  Michael.
		MR. PODUE:  I'll keep mine short.  Usually I say that and I go for an hour, but I'll keep it short.
		No, I'm -- I'm really excited about being here.  Filling shoes -- I mean, I -- you know, Ed was prior to me and my brother was prior to that.  So recently, if you're not aware, in the -- in our area we've had a couple of fatalities, tragic ones.  So -- and some of those issues are already in the guidelines for OSHA.  I don't know if there's any improvement that can be made to that, but I'm really excited about being here and possibly finishing some of those holdover items that have been lingering out there, and then hopefully be able to put in some new ideas that will -- I think we need to head in, so from the longshore side of it.
		So that's all I got.
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you.  Robert.
		MR. GODINEZ:  Right.  Yeah, first of all, you know, I'm happy that I got welcomed back.  I appreciate it.  You know, and also, you know, I appreciate the opportunity to help with the translation.  You know, that's something that, you know, I do every week at the shipyard.  We -- every week we do a handbill and keep workers informed of shipyard safety and, you know, necessities, and that's in translating into Spanish also.
		But I enjoyed today listening to the issues that are coming up and, you know, I concur with our brother here at the end that the separation of the longshore from the shipyard is vital so that we can get more out of -- you know, I also have the 30-hour maritime training, and I didn't get much out of it.  You know, I -- you know, I wish, you know, we had put more, you know, emphasis into it as far as shipyard or longshore, but mixing them together is -- wasn't beneficial.  And so that's something that I'd like to participate more, and now that I hear Amy's an instructor, so I'm sure she's going to help out quite a bit.
		But anyway, I appreciate, you know, listening to, you know, the things that are going on and hopefully contribute to making things better.  Thank you.
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you, Robert.  Alice.  And I want to say that I got an education last time on why you wear the uniform in the fifth branch of the service, so it was very informative.
		MS. SHUMATE:  I promise not to do that again.
		MR. RAFFO:  No, that's fine.
		(Laughter.)
		MR. RAFFO:  It was nothing against you.
		MS. SHUMATE:  You can ask me on the side if you're interested.
		MR. RAFFO:  Okay.
		MS. SHUMATE:  If anyone is interested.  So I just -- thanks.  I am really excited to be here and excited to be new here.  I'll say that I and NIOSH as well has interests in -- on both sides, both workgroups, and so I'm really excited to learn about how they work together as well and the work of the committee that comes together.
		I am also quite interested in digging in a little bit on the training and thinking about how to better serve our audience, both with our maritime targeted materials but also the idea of opening up some of those general courses, but potentially incorporating maritime examples that would ring true for maritime students in those courses.
		So I look forward to everything we do.
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you.  Larry.
		MR. RUSSELL:  Hi.  I'm happy to be here.  I'm a new -- new member as well, and also looking forward to working with the group on improving the outreach training program.  As it turns out, I just took the 5410 class in January as well as I've taken some other of the courses that are provided by the outreach training center that's up in my area.  So I'm happy to contribute there as well as any of the other work that the Shipyard Workgroup comes up with as it applies to fire protection, fire prevention and confined space safety that we're involved with on a daily basis with my activity with NFPA.
		So, glad to be here.
		MR. RAFFO:  Thank you.  David.
		MR. TURNER:  Yeah.  First of all, thank you for giving me this opportunity to serve on the committee.  I appreciate that.  I've been with this longshore, but it's my second charter, but been in the industry for 20 years one way or another and before that 15 years in trucking.  And I'll tell you, I think that my partners here on the union side will tell you that our industry has been a little slow in coming along in a lot of ways, but when I go to the dock and I go down there and I see changes and I see progressive safety changes, and it's part of the committee but it's also part of the work of the union, the ILA and the ILW and the things they do.