is your boss in compliance? or was he fooled into being non-compliant?

here is sine communication I’ve had with OSHA about a friend who was forced to use N95’s without training fut testing, and medical evaluations. I would call ot criminal Gross Negligence.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023, 3:13 PM Ma Tu

<oshafactchecker@gmail.com>

wrote: The letter in the mail came today..from Brown, Derek J. Sent Dec 22, 2022

Which states employees at the Norwich vet center are not required to use respirators, which is false. I have spoken to several employees who state that Jamie Harnandez the Director first forced them to use loosfitting surgical masks, which isn’t allowed because of

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2) The employer shall ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator is fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least annually thereafter.

So the CDC & FDA wants people to break the law while OSHA collects $8 million from Employers who allow it to happen? which is cited as the #1 citation for COVID-19 Specific citations during the pandemic and the Respiratory Protection program went from an average 4th/5th on top 10 most violated (and is a yearly report to the POTUS.

Norwich issued N95’s to employees.

Found here is those COVID-19 Specific citations.

https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/standards

Here is the cited covid-19 Specific citations for COVID-19 related citations from 2020 to Nov 2022

https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/covid-19-data/inspections-covid-related-citations

If the Employer/Director (Jamie Harnandez) allows them to use those Loose fitting masks he shall make sure it doesn’t become a hazard to the employee using it or other employees, via

OSHA 29 CFR Appendix (D-1) which is under OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(2)(i) An employer may provide respirators at the request of employees or permit employees to use their own respirators, if the employer determines that such respirator use will not in itself create a hazard. If the employer determines that any voluntary respirator use is permissible, the employer shall provide the respirator users with the information contained in appendix D to this section (“Information for Employees Using Respirators When Not Required Under the Standard”); and Found Here

https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134AppD

And also

https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20

Which states within it’s standard and Interpretations from OSHA that. Which states “However, surgical masks may not be used in lieu of required respiratory protection. Surgical masks are not considered respirators by OSHA and, as such, are not covered by 29 CFR 1910.134. They are fluid resistant, disposable, and loose-fitting protection that create a physical barrier between the mouth and nose of the wearer and potential contaminants in the immediate environment.”

From December 20, 2017. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20

However, surgical masks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, nor do they provide a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles.

While on July 7th 2021, OSHA put out this https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2021-07-07

FROM: PATRICK J. KAPUST, Acting DirectorDirectorate of Enforcement Programs

THROUGH: AMANDA EDENSDeputy Assistant Secretary

MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORSSTATE PLAN DESIGNEES,

Which states “This memorandum also includes policy changes regarding enforcement discretion for periodic respiratory protection equipment shortages and associated constraints (i.e., fit-testing supplies and provision of related services) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although OSHA had not waived compliance with any of its requirements during the pandemic, the agency set forth temporary enforcement discretion policies that CSHOs could consider when enforcing OSHA standards, such as the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134, and/or equivalent respiratory protection provisions of other health standards”

At some point those employees stated that N95 were issued to them without Training, without Fit Testing and without Medical Evaluations, which alone for each employee is a safery violation and more than $14,000 a citation and considered Wilful Neglest under OSHA’s standards. Today those 3 violations is upwards of $42,000 per employee.

If the VA employees in medical setting are required to wear a disposable protective medical mask per VA regulations, where is the OSHA 29 CFR 1960.17 Alternate standard request send to OSHA allowing and approving it prior to implementation.

Why is the standard OSHA 29 CFR 1960.46(a) being violated where VA is firing people who, for health reasons, refuse to wear a mask and or FFR Respitory when they haven’t performed the proper Medical Evaluations with the questionnaire OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix(c)

Found here

https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134AppC

which lists the many medical conditions that are designed to protect the Employee from those Employers like

Part A. Section 2. (Mandatory) Questions 1 through 9 below must be answered by every employee who has been selected to use any type of respirator (please circle “yes” or “no”).

1. Do you currently smoke tobacco, or have you smoked tobacco in the last month: Yes/No

2. Have you ever had any of the following conditions?a. Seizures: Yes/Nob. Diabetes (sugar disease): Yes/Noc. Allergic reactions that interfere with your breathing: Yes/Nod. Claustrophobia (fear of closed-in places): Yes/Noe. Trouble smelling odors: Yes/No

3. Have you ever had any of the following pulmonary or lung problems?

a. Asbestosis: Yes/No

b. Asthma: Yes/No

c. Chronic bronchitis: Yes/No

d. Emphysema: Yes/No

e. Pneumonia: Yes/No

f. Tuberculosis: Yes/No

g. Silicosis: Yes/Noh. Pneumothorax (collapsed lung): Yes/No

i. Lung cancer: Yes/No

j. Broken ribs: Yes/No

k. Any chest injuries or surgeries: Yes/Nol. Any other lung problem that you’ve been told about: Yes/No

4. Do you currently have any of the following symptoms of pulmonary or lung illness?

a. Shortness of breath: Yes/Nob. Shortness of breath when walking fast on level ground or walking up a slight hill or incline: Yes/No

c. Shortness of breath when walking with other people at an ordinary pace on level ground: Yes/No

d. Have to stop for breath when walking at your own pace on level ground: Yes/No

e. Shortness of breath when washing or dressing yourself: Yes/No

f. Shortness of breath that interferes with your job: Yes/No

g. Coughing that produces phlegm (thick sputum): Yes/No

h. Coughing that wakes you early in the morning: Yes/No

i. Coughing that occurs mostly when you are lying down: Yes/No

j. Coughing up blood in the last month: Yes/No

k. Wheezing: Yes/No

l. Wheezing that interferes with your job: Yes/No

m. Chest pain when you breathe deeply: Yes/No

n. Any other symptoms that you think may be related to lung problems: Yes/No

5. Have you ever had any of the following cardiovascular or heart problems?

a. Heart attack: Yes/No

b. Stroke: Yes/No

c. Angina: Yes/No

d. Heart failure: Yes/No

e. Swelling in your legs or feet (not caused by walking): Yes/No

f. Heart arrhythmia (heart beating irregularly): Yes/No

g. High blood pressure: Yes/No

h. Any other heart problem that you’ve been told about: Yes/No

6. Have you ever had any of the following cardiovascular or heart symptoms?

a. Frequent pain or tightness in your chest: Yes/No

b. Pain or tightness in your chest during physical activity: Yes/No

c. Pain or tightness in your chest that interferes with your job: Yes/No

d. In the past two years, have you noticed your heart skipping or missing a beat: Yes/No

e. Heartburn or indigestion that is not related to eating: Yes/No

f. Any other symptoms that you think may be related to heart or circulation problems: Yes/No

7. Do you currently take medication for any of the following problems?

a. Breathing or lung problems: Yes/No

b. Heart trouble: Yes/No

c. Blood pressure: Yes/No

d. Seizures: Yes/No

8. If you’ve used a respirator, have you ever had any of the following problems? (If you’ve never used a respirator, check the following space and go to question 9:)

a. Eye irritation: Yes/No

b. Skin allergies or rashes: Yes/No

c. Anxiety: Yes/No

d. General weakness or fatigue: Yes/No

e. Any other problem that interferes with your use of a respirator: Yes/No

9. Would you like to talk to the health care professional who will review this questionnaire about your answers to this questionnaire: Yes/No

I have tried to file an SEC Whistleblower case aginst the VA in Dec of 2021 & March of 2022, where the VA Whistleblower Analysts, Sam Glover, from PA said they were flowing FDA guidlines for EUA’s that have already been revoked (July 6th, 2021), and where FDA standards do not overrule OSHA and the Final Rule of 1998 by Suprime Court which state ample amounts of information for these rules and regulations.

This complain is correct, and their use is not in compliance with OSHA, all attempts to correct the situation have been blocked which is TITLE 18 USC 2071 violation which is up to 5 years in Prison.

As far as purchasing them masks over the counter at CVS, those EUS’s Sent out in Feb 4th of 2020 stated they still needed to be equivalent to NIOSH, if it wasnt equivalent to the NIOSH standard it broke FDA MOU’s for aporving masks (class II medical devices) which still had to have testing vs bacterial filtration efficiency (which no loose fit mask has ever passed the NIOSH certification), even NIOSH Regulations have been made to never test them again.

Surgical Masks also must be thrown away after each; use, task, or each patient, not walk room to room. Those EUA’s from the FDA allowing the sale of masks in stores has also been revoked because we now have plunty supple of peoper N95 respiratory protection available in the Huky 7th, 2021 memorandum aent to Administrators and state plan dessignees.

I have also been discriminated aginst by Jamie Harnandez under the ADA about the issue and my services even over the Phone have been blocked, when I have been asking for help with the Councelers, as my last counselor has just retired.

I have also filed a grevance about the VA when Dr. Kauffman threatened me for talking about the masks when he told me he puts it in his pocket when not walking the halls, which was 100% aginst all the spandards given by OSHA, CDC, & FDA altogether. The letter from from Brown, Derek J. Also says “The VA has medical has policies in place for medical accommodations” this doesn’t remove the requirement to have it on file, and the training records, the Fit Yesting, or the Medical Evaluations like a letter from the PLHCP which will state the use and limitations for the individual.

Those are based on his medical health, and if he fails he cannot wear ANY MASK, because it can be a danger to his health if having and medical conditions listed in OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix (c) while the PLHCP is supposed to use American National Standard Index (ANSI) Z88.2-Z88.6 Respiratory Protection standard and Evaluations.

This is Gross Criminal Negligence under the SAFE TO WORK ACT and those standards were designed to keep employees from being unsanitary and unsafe.

I have the training to be a Respiratory Protection Administrator and have been a HACCP Administrator, Compliance Officer, Instructor for Sanitation and Cross-contamination Prevention, Emergency Medical Assistance Team, Certified Professional Food Manager, Fire Fighter (and much more) while working on Submarines in the Navy.

V/r Matthew A. Tuinstra

I would like to know why OSHA neglected to take the issues adress and do a proper Investigation using the Field Operations Manual as I had to use on Submarines on a regular basis?

Are my CHSO’s guilty of Gross Criminal Negligence? Cause this doesn’t look good for any individual person to have this on his record. Remember TITLE 18 USC 1038 Fasle, Hoax, and Misleading information is a 5-20 year prison sentence and even Dr. Fauci and Dr. Robert Redfield can easily be exposed for the crimes.

Please adress those items one by one and let me know why you do not do an Inspection, because this is a form of Medical Terrorism from the Employer/Director of Norwich Veterans Center as it is his responsibility to follow those laws not make policy that was never approved under OSHA 29 CFR 1960.17 and is non-compliance ans not at all congruent with OSHA.

I have made many binders of all this information and copied most of those Documents for my personal Respiratory Protection program binders many times, and building another for personal use.

God Bless,Matthew Aaron Tuinstra.

no responce as of January 28, 2023 so I send them another email.

Did I scare you away? I have Rights to seek Redress for this issue. Under the 1st Amendment, you know the right to free speech, freedom of religon and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Under the 9th Ammendment, no matter how many rights given to society, nobody can deny or disparage. Just so you know disparage means: cannot make it seem worthless.

Under OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2) The employer shall ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator is fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least annually thereafter.

Which is also the #1 cited COVID-19 Specific violation, and theirs almost 3 years of them citine it af $14,000+ for each occurrence.

Theirfor if Veterans Affairs has a Policy for Employees to break this right and Protection under section 19 of the OSHA Act.

Anyone who tells me a loose fit mask is biological protection is liable under TITLE 18 USC 1038, which is False, Hoax, and Misleading information about Biological hazards, because they do not know my underlying medical issues.

I have Rights and protections that “No Employer, No employee, No Goverment agency can abuse”, not even the sitting POTUS has the authority to force me, or anyone else for that matter, just use

OSHA 29 CFR 1960.46(a) The head of each agency shall establish procedures to assure that no employee is subject to restraint, interference, coercion, discrimination or reprisal for filing a report of an unsafe or unhealthful working condition, or other participation in agency occupational safety and health program activities, or because of the exercise by such employee on behalf of himself or herself or others of any right afforded by section 19 of the Act, Executive Order 12196, or this part. These rights include, among other, the right of an employee to decline to perform his or her assigned task because of a reasonable belief that, under the circumstances the task poses an imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm coupled with a reasonable belief that there is insufficient time to seek effective redress through normal hazard reporting and abatement procedures established in accordance with this part.

I have also spoken to Employees who have been forced to wear a mask, first 2 years it was loose fit (which has been cited by CHSO’s all pandemic long in healthcare) then it was switched to N95’s, without; fitchecks, training, and medical evaluations. 1910.134(f)Fit testing. This paragraph requires that, before an employee may be required to use any respirator with a negative or positive pressure tight-fitting facepiece, the employee must be fit tested with the same make, model, style, and size of respirator that will be used. This paragraph specifies the kinds of fit tests allowed, the procedures for conducting them, and how the results of the fit tests must be used.

1910.134(f)(3)The employer shall conduct an additional fit test whenever the employee reports, or the employer, PLHCP, supervisor, or program administrator makes visual observations of, changes in the employee’s physical condition that could affect respirator fit. Such conditions include, but are not limited to, facial scarring, dental changes, cosmetic surgery, or an obvious change in body

weight1910.134(e)(1) General. The employer shall provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee’s ability to use a respirator, before the employee is fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace. The employer may discontinue an employee’s medical evaluations when the employee is no longer required to use a respirator.

1910.134(c)(1)(ii) Medical evaluations of employees required to use respirators.

I am also well aware of unlawful modifications to OSHA Standards and interpretations, specifically in regards to

https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20

Which removed very little information but the info removed was “NOTE: however Healthcare personnel shall not use facemasks as biological protection FFR’s” which now states “However, surgical masks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, nor do they provide a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles”. Not much of a change but a change it was a change indeed and a violation of TITLE 18 USC 2071 (Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally)

My friend who is employed, told me workers are being fired for non-compliance to those bad police which not only violated

OSHA 29 CFR 1960.46(a)[ listed above] but also the alternate policy must be equal or more protective than OSHA, then sent to OSHA under 1960.17 for assessment and approval.

OSHA 29 CFR 1060.17 An agency head may apply an alternate standard where deemed necessary, and shall, after consultation with employees or their representatives, including appropriate occupational safety and health committees, notify the Secretary and request approval of such alternate standards.

1960.17(a) Any request by the head of the agency for an alternate standard shall be transmitted to the Secretary.

1960.17(b) Any such request for an alternate standard shall not be approved by the Secretary unless it provides equivalent or greater protection for affected employees. Any such request shall include:

1960.17(b)(1) A statement of why the agency cannot comply with the OSHA standard or wants to adopt an alternate standard;

1960.17(b)(2) A description of the alternate standard;

1960.17(b)(3) An explanation of how the alternate standard provides equivalent or greater protection for the affected employees;

1960.17(b)(4) A description of interim protective measures afforded employees until a decision is rendered by the Secretary of Labor; and

1960.17(b)(5) A summary of written comments, if any, from interested employees, employee representatives, and occupational safety and health committees.

I would love to see this approval letter and the policy for Veterans Affairs in regards to loose-fit masks & Respitory Protection FFR’s to ensure I am protect and my Friends Employed are also Protected, and have been trying to get this via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and spoke to other OSHA Officers about it.

My CONCEN As far as this Brown, Derek J. is he even qualified to be the Program Administrator? Cause this Norwich Veterans Center has been in violation of not just OSHA laws but also ADA, which also offers protections to people and children with Athsma, Allergies, and other respiratory issues like Cronic Bronchitis.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) doesn’t have a list it has Conditions that when meet you are protected, and for Respiratory protection it lists senarios for kids in school, who are protected and don’t even know it, nor do the teachers.

Respectfully,

Matthew Aaron Tuinstra

Stay safe, improve your overall health and stop wearing those worthless devices that pise a risk to individuals with many medical conditions that can change daily.

God Bless,

Matthew A. Tuinsra

Let’s sue our Med 4 TITLE 18 USC 1038 Hoax, False, & Misleading information about biological hazards. Sue any Lawyer under TITLE 18 USC 2071 Consielment, if he doesn’t allow U free speech of crimes aginst Employee Rights under OSHA 29 CFR section 19, Excutive Order #12196, OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2), OSHA 29 CFR 1960.17, OSHA 29 CFR 1960.46(a). While the MSM & political leaders get TITLE 18 USC 35,241,242,1001,1038,2071 who convinced boss to break laws²protect employees from boss & Dr. #MAT

PolφƑʉͫcͧкͭιͪηͣṀa𝓣𝓣ꫝểω PƑṀ🧌

I love my country, and I find it very shameful our Goverment is forcing this medical terrorism in Veterans Affairs all while those Dr.’s and Nurces break the very laws concerning Respiratory Protection. I am more than qualified to be the Respiratory protection administrator for Veterans Affairs, and have been involved in it’s study, monitored programs, and training before joining the Navy and have nearly 20 years experience on the topic.

My parents also have underling medical conditions listed in OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix (C) which exclude them from use of anu negitive pressure mask or Respiratory Device.

My ex-wife is committing child Abuse because she also has no clue why those laws were made in the first place.

If a PLHCP saw a child approximately 2 years old or younger in a department store, by law he was required to call the police for child abuse.

Their was a reason Sept 5th was used as our N95 mask awareness day in 2011, and PAPRS in 2019. To protect you from not just your Boss but also your Dr.

I have copys of OSHA’s final rule which explain ample reason from 1970’s to 1990’s why those laws were i.plemented and why every alterations must be more protective not void of them.

In 2002 Respiratory Protection was #2 on the top 10 most sited violations,as it was in 2021, and for nearly 10 years Congress debated and held many fact finding missions to learn WHY it jumped from an avg of 4th most violated to 2nd most.

We have been denied our OSHA RIGHTS under sec. 19 of the OSH Act and Excutive Order #12196 which is clearly defined under 1960.46(a) of the OSH Act sec 19 and is directly for federal agencies like Veterans Affairs.

The written respiratory protection program is required at every establishment and on hand for every employee, and trains should be given at EVERY UPDATE or CHANGE and includes who, what, when, where, and why the change is more protective utilizing NPPTL 120 tests and scenarios which prove Bacterial Filtration Efficiency.

MRSA has a 50% Mortality and is the biological agent we use for those testing and what they found was “those devices become biohazards capable of causing death and serious bodily harm to those with underling medical conditions listed in the respiratory protection questionnaire OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix (C).

Today, and for over two years I have been requesting PAPRS so that I have the proper protection just to visit my Dr.

95% of Director’s for the building they are in charge of employee and patient safety do not have the Trai ing to be a respirator protection program administrator and have also failed to hire some like me to run it.

Ot is very much Criminal Negligence to enforce a policy in Veterans Affairs that make employees 100% likely to break those safety laws designed for your protection and also fits TITLE 19 USC 1038.

For them to hide the information violated TITLE 18 USC 2071. They have deleted many of the prior trainings and you will find many broken links on older OSHA pdf files concerning respiratory protection.

Knowing is half of the battle.

The Diagnostic Proces

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK338593/

Edible Mushrooms: Improving Human Health and Promoting Quality Life

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4320875/

Surgical Masks – Premarket Notification [510(k)] Submissions

https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/surgical-masks-premarket-notification-510k-submissions

https://www.fda.gov/media/71660/download

A Suggested Approach to Resolving Least Burdensome Issues removed from FDA Database.

Scope

The scope of this document is limited to the following devices described in 21 CFR §878.4040(b) class II, product codes:

FXX Surgical Mask
MSH Surgical N95 NIOSH certified Respirator

Surgical Mask

A surgical mask covers the user’s nose and mouth and provides a physical barrier to fluids and particulate materials. The surgical masks referenced in this guidance document include masks that are labeled as a surgical, laser, isolation, dental or medical procedure masks with or without a face shield.

Surgical Respirator “N95 NIOSH Certified”

A surgical respirator is fitted to the user’s face, forming a seal that provides a physical barrier to fluids, particulate materials, and aerosols. If you wish to label your device “N95 NIOSH Certified,” please refer to the (NIOSH) website at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/resources/certpgmspt/ for information about NIOSH’s Certification Program Support for Respirator Manufacturers.

New SearchHelp | More About 21CFR

[Code of Federal Regulations][Title 21, Volume 8][CITE: 21CFR878.4040] TITLE 21–FOOD AND DRUGSCHAPTER I–FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESSUBCHAPTER H – MEDICAL DEVICESPART 878 — GENERAL AND PLASTIC SURGERY DEVICESSubpart E – Surgical DevicesSec. 878.4040 Surgical apparel. (a) Identification. Surgical apparel are devices that are intended to be worn by operating room personnel during surgical procedures to protect both the surgical patient and the operating room personnel from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. Examples include surgical caps, hoods, masks, gowns, operating room shoes and shoe covers, and isolation masks and gowns. Surgical suits and dresses, commonly known as scrub suits, are excluded. (b) Classification.  (1) Class II (special controls) for surgical gowns and surgical masks. A surgical N95 respirator or N95 filtering facepiece respirator is not exempt if it is intended to prevent specific diseases or infections, or it is labeled or otherwise represented as filtering surgical smoke or plumes, filtering specific amounts of viruses or bacteria, reducing the amount of and/or killing viruses, bacteria, or fungi, or affecting allergenicity, or it contains coating technologies unrelated to filtration (e.g., to reduce and or kill microorganisms). Surgical N95 respirators and N95 filtering facepiece respirators are exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 878.9, and the following conditions for exemption: (i) The user contacting components of the device must be demonstrated to be biocompatible. (ii) Analysis and nonclinical testing must: (A) Characterize flammability and be demonstrated to be appropriate for the intended environment of use; and (B) Demonstrate the ability of the device to resist penetration by fluids, such as blood and body fluids, at a velocity consistent with the intended use of the device.(iii) NIOSH approved under its regulation. (2) Class I (general controls) for surgical apparel other than surgical gowns and surgical masks. The class I device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 878.9.[53 FR 23872, June 24, 1988, as amended at 65 FR 2317, Jan. 14, 2000; 83 FR 22848, May 17, 2018]

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-H/part-878/subpart-E/section-878.4040

Assessing hazards and determining the needs for respiratory protection

Expanded occupational use recommendation: Establish comprehensive workplace exposure standards with indicators for hazards (such as wildfire smoke) to trigger respiratory protection program requirements, including for those workplaces in which respirators would not otherwise be required.

Public use recommendation: Establish and use a standardized process for determining the public’s need for respiratory protection.

Determining the Necessary Respiratory Protective Devices

Expanded occupational use recommendation: Recommend only NIOSH-approved respirators for workers without respiratory protection programs facing inhalation hazards when other forms of control (e.g., engineering, administrative) fail to protect them.

Public use recommendation: Use hazard and risk evaluations to determine the necessary respiratory protective devices for the public.

In 2019 OSHA 1910.134 was 4 on the top most reported violations, in 2020 it rose to 3ed after being 4th for decades, and in 2021 it jumped ro 2nd. So after the pandemic we started breaking the rules.

[OSHA inspections FY 2019 total (https://www.osha.gov/data/commonstats)

Here is a list off all 5A1 Citations (OSHA VIOLATIONS) specifically aginst COVID-19 https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/covid-19-data/inspections-covid-related-citations

AS requested by the CDC Below”If your cloth mask is dry and clean, you can store it in a breathable bag (like a paper or mesh fabric bag) to keep it clean between uses in the same day.”
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html#:~:text=If%20your%20cloth%20mask%20is%20dry%20and%20clean%2C%20you%20can%20store%20it%20in%20a%20breathable%20bag%20(like%20a%20paper%20or%20mesh%20fabric%20bag)%20to%20keep%20it%20clean%20between%20uses%20in%20the%20same%20day.&nbsp;

Or OSHA do not do the CDC guidance less than 5 days.

“Although OSHA had not waived compliance with any of its requirements during the pandemic, the agency set forth temporary enforcement discretion policies that CSHOs could consider when enforcing OSHA standards, such as the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134, and/or equivalent respiratory protection provisions of other health standards.”
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2021-07-07#:~:text=Although%20OSHA%20had,other%20health%20standards.

1910.504(d)(3)(i)(B) 
The respirator has been stored in a breathable storage container (*e.g*., paper bag) for at least five calendar days between use and has been kept away from water or moisture;

It was a violation only months ago.

Phoenix, Arizona 12/17/2021

1910.504(d)(3)(i)(B) 
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.504#:~:text=1910.504(d)(3)(i)(B,away%20from%20water%20or%20moisture

Other important facts

December 20, 2017 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20 

State Plans are required to have standards and an enforcement program that are “at least as effective” as OSHA’s, but may have different or additional requirements.

Feb/Narch of 2020 I stopped talking to Dr. Kauffman because of TOTLE 18 USC 241/242 Abuse and threatening me not to talk about masks. I filed a grievance but saw no response to the offensive behavior this from Veterans Affairs lets alone a Dr. 

March 14, 2020  https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2020-03-14 1910.134 (d)(1)(ii) 

MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS STATE DESIGNEES. 

SUBJECT: Temporary Enforcement Guidance – Healthcare Respiratory Protection Annual Fit-Testing for N95 Filtering Facepieces During the COVID-19 Outbreak

currently recommends that Health Care Providers (HCP), who are providing direct care of patients with known or suspected COVID-19, practice infection control procedures. These include engineering controls (e.g., airborne infection isolation rooms), administrative controls (e.g., cohorting patients, designated HCP), work practices (e.g., handwashing, disinfecting surfaces), and appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE), such as gloves, face shields or other eye protection, and gowns.

Appropriate respiratory protection is required for all healthcare personnel providing direct care of these patients

April 3, 2020 03-14 April 3, 2020 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2020-04-03

1910.134(d)(1)(ii) 

1910.134(f)(2) 

1910.134 App B-1

MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS STATE PLAN DESIGNEES.

SUBJECT:

Enforcement Guidance for Respiratory Protection and the N95 Shortage Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

This memorandum provides additional guidance on enforcing OSHA’s respirator standard for all workers, including HCP. In light of the essential need for adequate supplies of respirators, this memorandum will take effect immediately and remain in effect until further notice. This guidance is intended to be time-limited to the current public health crisis. 

Enforcement Guidance

All employers whose employees are required to use or are permitted voluntary use of respiratory protection must continue to manage their respiratory protection programs (RPPs) in accordance with the OSHA respirator standard, and should pay close attention to shortages of N95s during the COVID-19 pandemic.[5] Paragraph (d)(1)(iii) in section 1910.134 requires such employers to identify and evaluate respiratory hazards in the workplace, and paragraph (c)(1) requires employers to develop and implement written RPPs with worksite-specific procedures and to update their written programs as necessary to reflect changes in workplace conditions that affect respirator use. CSHOs should generally refer to CPL 02-00-158, Inspection Procedures for the Respiratory Protection Standard, 6/26/2014, for further guidance.[6]

April 24, 2020. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2020-04-24MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS STATE PLAN DESIGNEES
SUBJECT: Enforcement Guidance on Decontamination of Filtering Facepiece Respirators in Healthcare During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

• Standard Number:1910.134 1910.134(d)(1)(ii)

Enforcement Guidance

All employers whose employees are required to use or are permitted voluntary use of respiratory protection must continue to manage their respiratory protection programs (RPPs) in accordance with the OSHA respirator standard, and should pay close attention to shortages of FFRs during the COVID-19 pandemic.[7] Paragraph (d)(1)(iii) in section 1910.134 requires employers to identify and evaluate respiratory hazards in the workplace, and paragraph (c)(1) requires employers to develop and implement written RPPs with worksite-specific procedures and to update their written programs as necessary to reflect changes in workplace conditions that affect respirator use. CSHOs should generally refer to CPL 02-00-158, Inspection Procedures for the Respiratory Protection Standard, 6/26/2014, for further guidance.[8]

January 26, 2021 Denver CO Veterans Affairs violation 1910.134 (f)(2) Employers ensure tight-fitting mask and record.

May 20, 2021 Salt Lake City Utah violation 1910.134 (e)(6)(i) No referral from Dr. After EXAM by PLHCP

July 7, 2021MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS STATE PLAN DESIGNEES

• Standard Number:1910.132 1910.134 1910.141 1910.145 1910.1020
• OSH Act:Section 5(a)(1)

This Updated Interim Enforcement Response Plan for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides new instructions and guidance to Area Offices and Compliance Safety and Health Officers (CSHOs) for handling COVID-19-related complaints, referrals, and severe illness reports in workplaces that are not covered by the June 21, 2021, Emergency Temporary Standard for COVID-19

Although OSHA had not waived compliance with any of its requirements during the pandemic, the agency set forth temporary enforcement discretion policies that CSHOs could consider when enforcing OSHA standards, such as the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134, and/or equivalent respiratory protection provisions of other health standards. 

July 20, 3021 Gilbert AZ Violations 1910.134 (d)(1)(ii) Not NIOSH Approved , 1910.134 (e)(6)(i)(A) Limitation, & 1910.134 (g)(1)(ii) corrective lenses 

Dec 2, 2021 Sputh Carolina Veterans Affairs violation of 1910.502 (h)(1) ensure 6 ft safety bubble.

Also on Dec 2, 2021 Veterans Affairs NL refused treatment while in wrong masks, and Whistleblower Sam Glover refused to take it. 1910.134 (f)(2) Tight Fit ensured by employers, 1910.134 (d)(1)(ii) wasn’t NIOSH approved, I know my limitations via 1910.134 (e)(6)(i)(A) because I understand why I’d fail 1910.134 (e)(6)(i) and another wxam would need to take place. Plus I have a beard and would require PAPR’S ro get any respiratory protection.  The Veterans Affairs patient advocate refused to take my claim aswell. 

December 16, 2021 Wyoming Michigan Veterans Affairs violation 1910.502 (f)(2)(i) which is a violation of 1910.134 and (several possibilities all mask related)

December 17, 2021 Phoenix AZ Veterans Affairs violation 1910.504 (d)(3)(i)(B) paper bag for greater than 5 days.

February 28, 2022 Bradford Massachusetts violations 1910.134 (f)(2) employers ensure employees are wearing tight fitting masks, 1910.502 (h)(1) employees stay 6ft apart whenever possible. 

March 4, 2022 I was again refused treatment from Veterans Affairs NL with a letter from the Director Mark Bielawski APRN, and he could not verify any laws which prevent my treatment.  Again this Whistleblower reported to Sam Glover and the Veterans Affairs Patient advocate no actiona were takes to resolve any issues. 

March 7, 2022 Baltimore Veterans Affairs violations 1910.134 (f)(2) employers ensure tight fitt masks, 1910.502 (f)(2)(i) another 1910.134 violation & more. 

April 14, 2022 Cincinnati OH Veterans Affairs violation 1910.134 (f)(2) employers ensure employees use tight fitting masks.

It was emphasized that NATO continues its pressures to continue expanding its borders especially towards the east of the European continent and its inovolvement in conflicts in their territory. Participants expressed their solidarity with the Ukrainian comrades who have directly faced the onslaught of neo fascism in their country. It was attempted on the life of many Communists who have been victims of violent attacks on their homes and the headquarters of the organization. https://21centurymanifesto.wordpress.com/2014/11/25/intermational-meeting-of-communists-and-workers-parties-communist-party-of-ecuador-statement/amp/?fbclid=IwAR3cjVyEyT_HBD_m-aEQbxUfeyJlKR89shqsbBzVepZjbrk9KppKzyQaud0#:~:text=The%20meeting%20analyzed%20the%20criminal%20mercenary%20bands%20organized,poverty%2C%20discrimination%20and%20without%20some%20hope%20for%20survival
The geopolitical significance of the region becomes battleground in the alleged fight against terrorism in times which increases the need to secure the sea lanes as essential for the development of trade to guarantee national security of the major world powers item.

The meeting analyzed the criminal mercenary bands organized by the CIA, the NATO, and permitted, encouraged and financed by reactionary governments in the Middle East that continue killing men, women, children and indigenous people in massive form, that have brought a forced migration full of hunger, poverty, discrimination and without some hope for survival. 

It was very wonderful to chat, I have gathered lots of data on this topic.

My website, self made

Exposing the Plandemic

Medical Terrorism

Senator Bill Frist https://www.c-span.org/video/?190239-1/pandemic-flu-preparedness&nbsp;

December 20, 2017 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20&nbsp;

March 14, 2020  https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2020-03-14&nbsp;

April 3, 2020 03-14 April 3, 2020 https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2020-04-03

“Although OSHA had not waived compliance with any of its requirements during the pandemic, the agency set forth temporary enforcement discretion policies that CSHOs could consider when enforcing OSHA standards, such as the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134, and/or equivalent respiratory protection provisions of other health standards.”

https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2021-07-07#:~:text=Although%20OSHA%20had,other%20health%20standards

This is some of the data I’ve still got access to, other information like 1918 Pandemic articles Co-Authored by Fauci himself was removed from PUBMED.GOV in 2020.

https://www.google.com/search?q=understand%20the%20difference%20OSHA&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CdXU5BFU3iO9YesdX17EWpOGsgIMCgIIABAAOgQIARAA&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&prmd=ivn&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBIQuIIBahcKEwiAn7-E9aP3AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBg&biw=384&bih=675#imgrc=EjGAuS0aOsOEUM

Did your Boss give you the facts as required by law? Those OSHA laws are 70 years old, and still people argue over excepted facts and tests by NPPTL.

Medical malpractice is a legal cause of action that occurs when a medical or health care professional, through a negligent act or omission, deviates from standards in their profession, thereby causing injury to a patient. The negligence might arise from errors in diagnosis, treatment, aftercare or health management.

Rember Single use?

I want you to join my group on MeWe or go HERE for misinformation or go to CNN for hoax information.

Are you doing it properly?

Study for OSHA shows Employers in 2020 who had 5A1 Citations for Wilful Neglect of OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 moved from 4th most common safety violation to 3ed most reported safety violation.

FROM: PATRICK J. KAPUST, Acting Director Directorate of Enforcement Programs 2021 Annual Adjustments to OSHA Civil Penalties

January 8, 2021 U.S. Department of Labor’s OSHA Announces $3,930,381 In Coronavirus Violations OSHA inspections have resulted in the agency citing employers for violations, including failures to:

1. Implement a written respiratory protection program;
2. Provide a medical evaluation, respirator fit test, training on the proper use of a respirator and personal protective equipment;
3. Report an injury, illness or fatality;
4. Record an injury or illness on OSHA recordkeeping forms; and
5. 5. Comply with the General Duty Clause of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.

Inspections with COVID-19 related Violations if you look to the far right, you will see hundreds on OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 5A1 Wilful Neglect violations. In 2020 their was 60,000 plus inspections and this number gets lower every year.

OMG here we have Microfiber Masks that did not pass any of the 510(k) reviews and would fail the NPPTL testing for NIOSH certification for use in hospitals and industries. This KN95, shown with GB2626 2019, is a product of China and those masks failed NIOSH certification because it didn’t allow proper airflow and due to Microfiber being a perfect breeding ground for biological hazards it is not responsible to buy this product, it’s a danger to you and others when not used properly and as a disposable single-use item. https://www.oprahdaily.com/life/health/g38960590/best-kn9product

1. “masking is a critical public health tool for preventing the spread of Covid-19,” and “any mask is better than no mask,”

False Both those statements are false. Masks are not at all critical in healthcare, PPE is the least effective form of protection out of all the cross containment prevention measures, and a bad mask can be more dangerous than using a mask, it could already be infected and doesn’t come sterilized**.

2. The agency says loosely woven cloth masks provide the least protection, layered finely woven products offer more protection, well-fitting disposable surgical masks and KN95s offer even more protection, and well-fitting NIOSH-approved respirators (including N95s) offer the highest level of protection.

False KN95 and well fitted surgical masks do not offer more protection, especially if their not single-use, their are levels of protection from extensive study, N, R, and P are for Not resistant, water and oil resistant, water and oil protection, as well as 95%, 99%, and 100% filter efficiency, this does not include Bacterial protection efficiency (BPE)

Order of efficiency of FFR’s
Least effective to most effective
SM’s (Surgical Masks)
N95
N99
N100
R95
R99
R100
P95
P99
P100
Half face elastomeric respirator
Air Supplied respirators or PAPR’s

So the best protection is with Air Supplied or PAPR’s

3. The N95 and KN95 respirator masks are largely the same, explains Niket Sonpal, MD, an internist in New York City.

False those masks are 100% completely different and KN95’s are a danger to people who already have underlying healtissues like; COPD, athsma, lung cancer or recovering, influenza, Bronchitis, Tuberculosis, Pneumonia, allergies, or when exposed to some chemicals that absorbed into the cloth, as listed in OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134 Appendix (C) with your ANSI/ASSE Z88.2 – 2015 Practices for Respiratory Protection and Z88.6 Respiratory use Qualification exam.

NOTE: Niket Sonpal violated TITLE 18 USC 1038, and is on Oprah’s news website. violation is 5 to 20 years in prison and/or up to $200,000 in fines.

4. “Both masks are rated to capture 95 percent of tiny particles (0.3 micron particles),” he says. “The difference between them is considered to be the pressure drop while inhaling, but this is primarily to protect healthcare workers.

FALSE they knew this wouldn’t pass the FDA 510(k) review because it is a negitive pleasure loose-fitting mask, and it’s made out of thick Microfiber (breeding ground for biological hazards) P.S. SM’s and FFR’s like N95’s are tested with 0.1-micron latex spheres not 0.3 as listed on the Fake Oprah’s news website.

5. With this in mind, a KN95 mask is your best bet for the most protection against Covid-19 during day-to-day activities.

False masks are the lease effect measures to prevent the spread of biohazards. The most effective is PAPR’s and other Air Supplied Respiratory Protection.

6. Finally, adjust the metal nose clip to the shape of your nose and adjust fit as necessary to reduce airflow around the mask.

DANGER necessary to reduce airflow, are you trying to cause hypoxia? Which also is rather deadly and has the same symptoms as Coronavirus, Colds, Flu, SARS, and Pneumonia.

7. Be sure to change out your mask at least every few wears. The CDC says healthcare workers can wear an N95 mask up to five times, says Sonpal.

False it is recommended to be disposable, single-use just as the SM’s and FFR N95’s. It wasn’t ever recommended to use more than once untill.the Pandemic, and their is a list of cleaning agents healthcare can use up to 3 times between patients to conserve on supplies when running low, if it’s not running low it’s single use to prevent spreading biohazards from patient #1 and giving to patient #2 the HAI.

Risks to Health

In the table below, FDA has identified the risks to health generally associated with the use of the surgical masks addressed in this document. The information we recommend you include in your 510(k) to address these identified risks are given in this guidance document, as shown in the table below. We recommend that you conduct a risk analysis, before submitting your 510(k), to identify any other risks specific to your device. The 510(k) should describe the risk analysis method. If you elect to use an alternative approach to address a particular risk identified in this document, or have identified risks additional to those in this document, you should provide sufficient detail to support the approach you have used to address that risk.

Identified risk

Inadequate fluid resistance

Inadequate barrier for bacteria

Inadequate air exchange (differential pressure)

Flammability

Inadequate respiratory barrier for bacteria

NIOSH certification, Surgical masks include parts that have prolonged contact with intact skin. We recommend that you evaluate the biocompatibility of the materials in these parts as described in the standard ISO-10993, “Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices Part 1: Evaluation and Testing” for limited contact devices, contacting intact skin. We also recommend that you document the results in your design history file as a part of the Quality Systems Requirements (21 CFR 820.30). You should select tests appropriate for the duration and level of contact with your device. If identical materials are used in a predicate device with the same type and duration of skin contact, you may identify the predicate device in lieu of performing biocompatibility testing.

“Filtration Efficiency
For surgical masks that are not NIOSH certified N95 Respirators, we recommend that you evaluate filter efficiency performance and bacterial filtration efficiency. For surgical masks that are NIOSH certified N95 Respirators, you may submit your NIOSH certification number in lieu of this information.

Particulate Filtration Efficiency

We recommend that you conduct a particle challenge study using 0.1-Micron Polystyrene Latex Spheres. This in vitro test challenges the mask with unneutralized 0.1-micron polystyrene latex spheres and measures penetration. The use of latex spheres provides an appropriately rigorous test for evaluating a submicron efficiency performance (ASTM F 1215-89 Standard Test Method for Determining the Initial Efficiency of Flatsheet Filter Medium in an Airflow Using Latex Spheres.).

Bacterial Filtration Efficiency

Bacterial Filtration Efficiency (BFE) is a measure of the ability of the mask’s material to prevent the passage of aerosolized bacteria. BFE is expressed in the percentage of a known quantity that does not pass the mask material at a given aerosol flow rate. We recommend that you evaluate the BFE of your device using one of the test methods or standards listed below.

Bacterial Penetration (aerosol filtration) – Mil- M369454C, Military Specifications: Surgical Mask, disposable (June 12, 1975).
Modified Greene and Vesley Method: Method for evaluation of bacterial filtration efficiency of surgical masks. J Bacteriol 83:663-667. (1962).
ASTM F2101-01 Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Bacterial Filtration Efficiency (BFE) of surgical masks using a Biological Aerosol of Staphylococcus aureus.
Back to the top”

“For the U.S. market, Freudenberg Performance Materials is now providing FDA cleared surgical masks meeting the Level 3 standard of the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). The ASTM Level 3 surgical mask is for use in conditions where there is a high risk of fluid and spray of aerosol transmission, such as operating procedures. The masks are a single use, disposable device provided non-sterile“

“Abstract
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in hospitalized children were identified by indirect fluorescent antibody technique. Patients with RSV infections were assigned to one of two isolation categories. In one category, the health care workers entering the child’s room did not wear masks and goggles; in the other category, the workers did wear masks and goggles. The RSV illness rate in health care workers using masks and goggles was 5%, but the rate for those using masks and not goggles was 61%. In the no mask/goggles group, the RSV illness rates in the health care workers correlated directly with the number of exposures. In this modest study, the use of masks and goggles was associated with a significant reduction of RSV illnesses in pediatric health care workers.”
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ClearReflectingEuropeanpolecat-mobile.jpg#h=360w=640

Dr. Fauci lied and many people died

TSA stops enforcing mask mandate on planes after Florida judge ruling
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/LavishFaintHake-size_restricted.gif

“At Denver Children’s Hospital, Murphy et al looked at the effectiveness of gowns and masks in preventing RSV infection in pediatric hospital personnel 6. They found that gowning and masking did not increase personal protection against RSV infection above that which was provided by the usual hand-washing routine 6. We at UCLA and Hall and her colleagues were both aware that conjunctional surfaces could be a site for RSV infections [7–10]. Our group compared standard isolation precautions with standard procedures supplemented by the use of masks and goggles. Among the healthcare workers who wore masks and goggles for clinical care, the infection rate was 5% compared with 61% among the healthcare workers who did not wear masks and goggles “

“Face masks (or medical masks) and respirators are the most commonly used PPE to protect from influenza and other respiratory infection in healthcare settings. However, these two products are not the same. Face masks are not designed for respiratory protection and are used to avoid respiratory droplet and spray of body fluids on the face

VAERS  APRIL 8TH 2022

26,976 DEATHS
277 MORE DEATHS IN JUST 7 DAYS
219,865 SERIOUS INJURIES
2,564 MORE INJURIES IN JUST 7 DAYS

MISCARRIAGES 4,496
HEART ATTACKS 13,819
MYO/PERICARDITIS 38,605
PERMANENTLY DISABLED 50,100
LIFE THREATENING 30,293
SHINGLES 13,413
AND THE LIST GOES ON

1.5 hours of Vaccine Adverse Reactions

Have a beautiful day

Who remembers Senator Bill Frist from 2010#1)
Fact references December 20, 2017
27 months later…..March 14, 2020
almost 3 weeks later…..April 3, 2020
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/YellowishTimelyAdder-max-1mb.gif#h=720w=1280

“December 20, 2017 Mr. John Boren 3633 Wareham Drive Thompsons Station, TN 37179

Dear Mr. Boren:

Thank you for your letter to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Your letter has been referred to the Directorate of Enforcement Programs for an answer to your question. Your letter requested clarification of OSHA’s Respiratory Protection Standard, 29 CFR 1910.134, pertaining to the voluntary use of surgical masks. This letter constitutes OSHA’s interpretation only of the requirements discussed herein, and may not be applicable to any questions not delineated within your original correspondence. Your paraphrased question and our response are below.

Question: Is it permissible to allow surgical masks to be worn on a voluntary basis when respiratory protection is not required to meet any OSHA standards? And if so, is it permissible for employers to provide surgical masks for voluntary use?

Response: Yes. The employer may allow the voluntary use of surgical masks even where an exposure assessment shows respirator use is not required and the employer may provide surgical masks for voluntary use. However, surgical masks may not be used in lieu of required respiratory protection. Surgical masks are not considered respirators by OSHA and, as such, are not covered by 29 CFR 1910.134. They are fluid resistant, disposable, and loose-fitting protection that create a physical barrier between the mouth and nose of the wearer and potential contaminants in the immediate environment. They are commonly used in health care settings for the protection of the patient and they are also often used to prevent splashes from contacting the face of the wearer. However, surgical masks do not seal tightly to the wearer’s face, nor do they provide a reliable level of protection from inhaling smaller airborne particles.

If the hazard to which your employees are exposed to is a combination of splashes and respirable contaminants, your company may want to consider NIOSH approved surgical N95 respirators which also are cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use as a surgical mask. Surgical N95s are filtering facepiece respirators equipped with spray- or splash-resistant facemask material on the outside to protect the wearer from splashes. Regardless of which type is used, the employees should be informed on the different varieties and their unique set of cautions, limitations, and restrictions of use. This information will facilitate employee involvement in the respirator program and/or the overall safety and health program.

For more information on surgical masks and surgical respirators, please review the Hospital Respiratory Protection Program Toolkit at https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3767.pdf. OSHA also has a fact sheet that compares respirators and surgical masks titled Respiratory Infection Control: Respirators Versus Surgical Masks that is available at https://www.osha.gov/Publications/respirators-vs-surgicalmasks-factsheet.html.

Please be aware that the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development operates its own occupational safety and health program under an OSHA-approved State Plan. The Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Administration (TOSHA) adopts and enforces standards and investigates safety and health concerns in workplaces throughout the state. State Plans are required to have standards and an enforcement program that are “at least as effective” as OSHA’s, but may have different or additional requirements. Please contact TOSHA directly at the address below, for further information and to discuss your specific compliance issue:

Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development

220 French Landing Drive
Nashville, Tennessee
Telephone: (615) 741-2793
https://www.tn.gov/workforce/employees/safety-health/tosha.html

Thank you for your interest in occupational safety and health. We hope you find this information helpful. OSHA’s requirements are set by statute, standards, and regulations. Our letters of interpretation do not create new or additional requirements but rather explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances. This letter constitutes OSHA’s interpretation of the requirements discussed. From time to time, letters are affected when the agency updates a standard, a legal decision impacts a standard, or changes in technology affect the interpretation. To assure that you are using the correct information and guidance, please consult OSHA’s website at http://www.osha.gov. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact the Office of Health Enforcement at (202) 693-2190.

Sincerely,

Thomas Galassi, Director
Directorate of Enforcement Programs

Department of Labor logoUNITED”
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20#:~:text=December%2020%2C%202017,UNITED
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/HandsomeVariableGalapagosalbatross-max-1mb.gif#h=720w=1280

March 14, 2020 MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS STATE DESIGNEES

THROUGH: AMANDA EDENS, Deputy Assistant Secretary FROM: PATRICK J. KAPUST, Acting Director Directorate of Enforcement Programs

SUBJECT: Temporary Enforcement Guidance – Healthcare Respiratory Protection Annual Fit-Testing for N95 Filtering Facepieces During the COVID-19 Outbreak

This memorandum provides temporary enforcement guidance to Compliance Safety and Health Officers for enforcing the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134, with regard to supply shortages of N95 filtering facepiece respirators due to the COVID-19 outbreak. The Respiratory Protection standard has specific requirements, including a written program, medical evaluation, fit-testing, and training, that employers must follow to ensure workers are provided and are properly using appropriate respiratory protection when necessary to protect their health.1 On March 11, 2020, the President directed the Department of [Health and Human services to “take all appropriate and necessary steps with respect to general use respirators to facilitate their emergency use by healthcare personnel in healthcare facilities and elsewhere,” and he directed the Department of Labor to “consider all appropriate and necessary steps to increase the availability of respirators.”] In light of the Presidential Memorandum, OSHA is providing this temporary guidance for 29 CFR § 1910.134, regarding required annual fit-testing (paragraph (f)(2)), which is to take effect from the date of this memorandum and remain in effect until further notice.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) currently recommends that Health Care Providers (HCP), who are providing direct care of patients with known or suspected COVID-19, practice infection control procedures. These include engineering controls (e.g., airborne infection isolation rooms), administrative controls (e.g., cohorting patients, designated HCP), work practices (e.g., handwashing, disinfecting surfaces), and appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE), such as gloves, face shields or other eye protection, and gowns.

Appropriate respiratory protection is required for all healthcare personnel providing direct care of these patients. For additional guidance, see COVID-19 Hospital Preparedness Assessment Tool, [https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/hcp-hospital-checklist.html][https_www.cdc.gov_coronavirus_2019-ncov_hcp_hcp-hospital-checklist.html].

OSHA recommends HCP employers follow existing CDC guidelines, including taking measures to conserve supplies of these respirators while safeguarding HCP. One such measure is that healthcare employers may provide HCP with another respirator of equal or higher protection, such as N99 or N100 filtering facepieces, reusable elastomeric respirators with appropriate filters or cartridges, or powered air purifying respirators (PAPR). Another measure is that healthcare employers may change the method of fit testing from a destructive method (i.e., quantitative) to a non-destructive method (i.e., qualitative). For filtering facepiece respirators, qualitative and quantitative fit-testing methods are both effective at determining whether the respirator fits properly. See 29 CFR § 1910.134, Appendix A, [Fit Testing Procedures][].2 The fitted respirator can then be safely used for work tasks that require respiratory protection. For additional guidance, see Strategies for Optimizing the Supply of N95 Respirators, [https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirator-supply-strategies.html][https_www.cdc.gov_coronavirus_2019-ncov_hcp_respirator-supply-strategies.html].3

OSHA field offices shall exercise enforcement discretion concerning the annual fit testing requirement, 29 CFR § 1910.134(f)(2), as long as employers:

Make a good-faith effort to comply with 29 CFR § 1910.134;

Use only NIOSH-certified respirators;

Implement CDC and OSHA strategies for optimizing the supply of N95 filtering facepiece respirators and prioritizing their use, as discussed above;

Perform initial fit tests for each HCP with the same model, style, and size respirator that the worker will be required to wear for protection against COVID-19 (initial fit testing is essential to determine if the respirator properly fits the worker and is capable of providing the expected level of protection);

Inform workers that the employer is temporarily suspending the annual fit testing of N95 filtering facepiece respirators to preserve and prioritize the supply of respirators for use in situations where they are required to be worn;

Explain to workers the importance of performing a user seal check (i.e., a fit check)  at each donning to make sure they are getting an adequate seal from their respirator, in accordance with the procedures outlined in 29 CFR § 1910.134, Appendix B-1, User Seal Check Procedures.4 See also, OSHA tutorial videos (English, Spanish).5

Conduct a fit test if they observe visual changes in the employee’s physical condition that could affect respirator fit (e.g., facial scarring, dental changes, cosmetic surgery, or obvious changes in body weight) and explain to workers that, if their face shape has changed since their last fit test, they may no longer be getting a good facial seal with the respirator and, thus, are not being adequately protected; and,

Remind workers that they should inform their supervisor or their respirator program administrator if the integrity and/or fit of their N95 filtering facepiece respirator is compromised.

NOTE: Workers should visually inspect the N95 respirator to determine if the structural and functional integrity of the respirator has been compromised. Over time, components such as the straps, nose bridge, and nose foam material may degrade, which can affect the quality of the fit and seal. If the structural and functional integrity of any part of the respirator is compromised, or if a successful user seal check cannot be performed, discard the respirator and try another respirator.

Where the use of respiratory protection is required and an employer fails to comply with any other requirements, such as initial fit testing, maintenance, care, and training in the Respiratory Protection standard, cite the applicable section(s) of 29 CFR § 1910.134.

To emphasize, this is an enforcement discretion policy, beginning from the date of this memorandum, and applicable where respirators are needed to protect HCP during the COVID-19 outbreak. This temporary enforcement discretion policy will no longer apply upon notification. If you have any questions regarding this policy, please contact Dr. Dionne Williams at (202) 693-2140.

cc:  DCSP
DTSEM
DSG

[Correction 4/14/2020]

1 See 29 CFR § 1910.134 at: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134.

2 See Appendix A, Fit Testing Procedures at: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134AppA.

3 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/infection-control/control-recommendations.html.

4 See Appendix B-1, User Seal Check Procedures at: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134AppB1.

5 See OSHA respirator videos at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzpz5fko-fg (English); https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgRKuRcTGeE (Spanish).

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AgreeableSlowBrontosaurus-max-1mb.gif#h=248w=330

April 3, 2020 MEMORANDUM FOR: REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS STATE PLAN DESIGNEES

THROUGH: AMANDA EDENS, Deputy Assistant Secretary FROM: PATRICK J. KAPUST, Acting Director Directorate of Enforcement Programs

SUBJECT: Enforcement Guidance for Respiratory Protection and the N95 Shortage Due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

This memorandum provides interim guidance to Compliance Safety and Health Officers (CSHOs) for enforcing the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134, and certain other health standards, with regard to supply shortages of disposable N95 filtering facepiece respirators. Specifically, it outlines enforcement discretion to permit the extended use and reuse of respirators, as well as the use of respirators that are beyond their manufacturer’s recommended shelf life (sometimes referred to as “expired”). This guidance applies in all industries, including workplaces in which:

Healthcare personnel (HCP) are exposed to patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other sources of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19).

Protection of workers exposed to other respiratory hazards is impacted by the shortage resulting from the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Such workplace respiratory hazards may be covered by one or more substance-specific health standards.

Our previous memorandum, Temporary Enforcement Guidance – Healthcare Respiratory Protection Annual Fit-Testing for N95 Filtering Facepieces During the COVID-19 Outbreak, issued on March 14, 2020, provided temporary guidance for 29 CFR § 1910.134, regarding required annual fit testing of HCP.1 This memorandum provides additional guidance on enforcing OSHA’s respirator standard for all workers, including HCP. In light of the essential need for adequate supplies of respirators, this memorandum will take effect immediately and remain in effect until further notice. This guidance is intended to be time-limited to the current public health crisis. Please frequently check OSHA’s webpage at www.osha.gov/coronavirus for updates.

Background

The COVID-19 outbreak, which the World Health Organization recently declared a global pandemic, has created an increased demand for N95 filtering facepiece respirators, limiting availability for use in protecting workers in healthcare and emergency response from exposure to the virus. As a result, the President directed the Secretary of Labor to “[consider] all appropriate and necessary steps to increase the availability of respirators.”2

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) letter permitting National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved, disposable filtering facepiece respirators, including those that were NIOSH-approved but have since passed the manufacturer’s recommended shelf life, to be used in healthcare settings to mitigate further transmission of SARS-CoV-2.3

During N95 filtering facepiece respirator (FFR) shortages, the federal government advises that specific N95 FFRs that are beyond their manufacturer’s recommended shelf life will provide greater protection than surgical masks (i.e., facemasks, other than surgical N95s; see below) or non-NIOSH-approved masks (e.g., homemade masks or improvised mouth and nose covers, such as bandanas). NIOSH has tested a sample of N95 FFRs that are beyond their manufacturer’s recommended shelf life from facilities across the United States and determined that certain N95 models continue to protect against the hazards for which they would ordinarily be appropriate (for N95 FFRs, this means they are still expected to filter out 95% of particles of the most penetrating particle size, or 0.3 µm). However, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and NIOSH have recommended that expired N95 FFRs be used only as outlined in their Strategies for Optimizing the Supply of N95 Respirators.4 For more information, see www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/release-stockpiled-N95.html.

Enforcement Guidance

All employers whose employees are required to use or are permitted voluntary use of respiratory protection must continue to manage their respiratory protection programs (RPPs) in accordance with the OSHA respirator standard, and should pay close attention to shortages of N95s during the COVID-19 pandemic.5 Paragraph (d)(1)(iii) in section 1910.134 requires such employers to identify and evaluate respiratory hazards in the workplace, and paragraph (c)(1) requires employers to develop and implement written RPPs with worksite-specific procedures and to update their written programs as necessary to reflect changes in workplace conditions that affect respirator use. CSHOs should generally refer to CPL 02-00-158, Inspection Procedures for the Respiratory Protection Standard, 6/26/2014, for further guidance.6

Due to the impact on workplace conditions caused by limited supplies of N95 FFRs, all employers should reassess their engineering controls, work practices, and administrative controls to identify any changes they can make to decrease the need for N95 respirators. Employers should, for example, consider whether it is possible to increase the use of wet methods or portable local exhaust systems or to move operations outdoors. In some instances, an employer may also consider taking steps to temporarily suspend certain non-essential operations.

If respiratory protection must be used, employers may consider use of alternative classes of respirators that provide equal or greater protection compared to an N95 FFR, such as NIOSH-approved, non-disposable, elastomeric respirators or powered, air-purifying respirators (PAPRs). Other filtering facepiece respirators, such as N99, N100, R95, R99, R100, P95, P99, and P100, are also permissible alternatives for those who are unable to obtain N95 FFRs. However, per 29 CFR § 1910.134(d)(1)(ii), when considering N95 alternatives, check to ensure that they are NIOSH-approved, at www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/topics/respirators/disp_part/default.html. When these alternatives are not available, or where their use creates additional safety or health hazards, employers may consider the extended use or reuse of N95 FFRs or use of N95 FFRs that were NIOSH-approved but have since passed the manufacturer’s recommended shelf life.

The following specific enforcement guidance is provided for CSHOs inspecting workplaces where workers are using N95 FFRs.

All employers:

Extended use or reuse of N95s:
In the event extended use or reuse of N95 FFRs becomes necessary, the same worker is permitted to extend use of or reuse the respirator, as long as the respirator maintains its structural and functional integrity and the filter material is not physically damaged, soiled, or contaminated (e.g., with blood, oil, paint).7 Employers must address in their written RPPs the circumstances under which a disposable respirator will be considered contaminated and not available for extended use or reuse. Extended use is preferred over reuse due to contact transmission risk associated with donning/doffing during reuse. When respirators are being re-used, employers should pay particular attention to workers’ proper storage of the FFRs in between periods of reuse.

Users should perform a user seal check each time they don a respirator and should not use a respirator on which they cannot perform a successful user seal check. See 29 CFR § 1910.134, Appendix B-1, User Seal Check Procedures.8

Employers should train workers to understand that if the structural and functional integrity of any part of the respirator is compromised, it should be discarded, and that if a successful user seal check cannot be performed, another respirator should be tried to achieve a successful user seal check.

If reuse of respirators is necessary, an appropriate sequence for donning/doffing procedures should be used to prevent contamination, and training needs to address appropriate donning/doffing procedures. See www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/pdfs/PPE-Sequence-508.pdf.

Use of expired N95s:
In the event that N95s are not available and the employer has shown a good faith effort to acquire the respirators or to use alternative options, as outlined below, CSHOs should exercise enforcement discretion for the use of N95 FFRs beyond the manufacturer’s recommended shelf life, including surgical N95s.9

Employers may use only previously NIOSH-certified expired N95 FFRs found at www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/release-stockpiled-N95.html. Workers should be notified that they are using expired N95s.

Purchasers and users of personal protective equipment should not co-mingle products that are past their manufacturer’s recommended shelf life (i.e., expired) with items that are within their shelf life.

Employers should visually inspect, or ensure that workers visually inspect, the N95 FFRs to determine if the structural and functional integrity of the respirator has been compromised. Over time, components such as the straps, nose bridge, and nose foam material may degrade, which can affect the quality of the fit and seal.

Where an employer has expired N95s available from their own stored cache (i.e., not from the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile), the employer should seek assistance from the respirator manufacturer or independent lab regarding testing of those stored respirators prior to use.

Healthcare employers only:

Expired N95s generally must not be used when HCP:

Perform surgical procedures on patients infected with, or potentially infected with, SARS-CoV-2, or perform or are present for procedures expected to generate aerosols or procedures where respiratory secretions are likely to be poorly controlled (e.g., cardiopulmonary resuscitation, intubation, extubation, bronchoscopy, nebulizer therapy, sputum induction).

In accordance with CDC guidance for optimizing the supply of respirators, employers should prioritize the use of N95 respirators by activity type. When HCP perform or are present for aerosol-generating procedures or procedures where respiratory secretions are likely to be poorly controlled, use respirators (including N95 FFRs; other FFRs; non-disposable, elastomeric respirators; and PAPRs) that are still within their manufacturer’s recommended shelf life, if available, before using respirators that are beyond their manufacturer’s recommended shelf life. See www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirators-strategy/contingency-capacity-strategies.html. The CDC guidance also addresses scenarios in which other crisis standards of care may need to be considered, but this enforcement guidance is not intended to cover those scenarios.

As mentioned above, the FDA has concluded that respirators approved by NIOSH, but not currently meeting the FDA’s requirements, may be protective against SARS-CoV-2. The FDA is providing a list of authorized emergency-use respirators for HCP. Healthcare employers may view the list of approved respirators, and respirator manufacturers and stockpile managers may find information about how to obtain approval for expired respirators, at: www.fda.gov/media/135763/download and http://www.fda.gov/media/135921/download.

Citation guidance:

OSHA will, on a case-by-case basis, exercise enforcement discretion when considering issuing citations under 29 CFR § 1910.134(d) and/or the equivalent respiratory protection provisions of other health standards in cases where:

The employer has made a good faith effort to obtain other alternative filtering facepiece respirators, reusable elastomeric respirators, or PAPRs appropriate to protect workers;

The employer has monitored their supply of N95s and prioritized their use according to CDC guidance (www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/release-stockpiled-N95.html; www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirators-strategy/index.html);

Surgical masks and eye protection (e.g., face shields, goggles) were provided as an interim measure to protect against splashes and large droplets (note: surgical masks are not respirators and do not provide protection against aerosol-generating procedures); and

Other feasible measures, such as using partitions, restricting access, cohorting patients (healthcare), or using other engineering controls, work practices, or administrative controls that reduce the need for respiratory protection, were implemented to protect employees.

Where the above efforts are absent and respiratory protection use is required, or voluntary use is permitted, and an employer fails to comply with fit testing, maintenance, care, and training requirements, cite the applicable provision(s) of 29 CFR § 1910.134 and/or other applicable expanded health standards as serious violations. If you have any questions regarding this policy, please contact the Directorate  of Enforcement Programs at (202) 693-2190.

cc:       DCSP
DTSEM
DSG

[Corrected 4/8/2020]

1 OSHA Memorandum on Temporary Enforcement Guidance – Healthcare Respiratory Protection Annual Fit-Testing for N95 Filtering Facepieces During the COVID-19 Outbreak, March 14, 2020, at www.osha.gov/memos/2020-03-14/temporary-enforcement-guidance-healthcare-respiratory-protection-annual-fit. Back to Text

2 www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-making-general-use-respirators-available/. Back to Text

3 www.fda.gov/media/135763/download. Back to Text

4 www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/respirator-supply-strategies.html. Back to Text

5 See also, OSHA letter of interpretation to John Boren, Voluntary Use of Surgical Masks, 12/20/2017, at: www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2017-12-20. Back to Text

6 www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/cpl-02-00-158. Back to Text

7 See NIOSH webpage defining the difference between extended use and re-use of N95s at: www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hcwcontrols/recommendedguidanceextuse.html. Back to Text

8 User Seal Check Procedures, at: www.osha.gov/laws-regs/ regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134AppB1. OSHA tutorial videos are available at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzpz5fko-fg (English); www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgRKuRcTGeE (Spanish). Back to Text

9 Surgical N95s are NIOSH-approved N95 FFRs that are also certified by the FDA for use as a surgical mask. Surgical N95s are normally tested for fluid resistance and flammability. These requirements were not evaluated as part of the NIOSH shelf life testing discussed in this memorandum. CDC/NIOSH does not recommend using N95s beyond the manufacturer-designated shelf life in surgical settings. Back to Text[Back to Text 8]

[Back to Text 8]: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2020-04-03#_ftnref9 https://thumbs.gfycat.com/JealousRequiredFennecfox-max-1mb.gif#h=602w=1000

Who remembers Senator Bill Frist from 2010#1)
Fact references December 20, 2017
27 months later…..March 14, 2020
almost 3 weeks later…..April 3, 2020

Even Twitter refuses to allow truth to be posted.

we have 100 plus years of continuous study on Masks.