The authors of this letter are journalists, columnists, bloggers and content publishers for the workers' compensation industry across the United States. We are a politically and professionally diverse group. We do not agree on everything, yet find ourselves of one opinion on a highly critical matter. We are competitors who are now colleagues for a common cause; to bring light to a serious injustice being committed within your state.
The prosecution of Charles (Sandy) Blunt was, in our view, an outrageous and almost farcical event. It is, in the final analysis, a travesty that has damaged the national view of your state, hampered the operation of a State agency, and ruined the life of a good man wholly undeserving of such results. (WCxKit)
Sandy Blunt was Director of North Dakota's Workforce Safety & Insurance from May of 2004 until December of 2007. He was, as you are likely aware, prosecuted by state authorities for “misspending government funds”. Specifically, he was charged and convicted on two counts
1. During his almost 4 year tenure his agency spent approximately $11,000 on employee incentive items, including flowers, trinkets, balloons, decorations and beverages for Workforce Safety and Insurance employee meetings, and on gift certificates and cards in small denominations for restaurants, stores and movie theaters. Blunt personally approved some of these expenditures. Others were made by managers as part of daily operations under his watch. Not a dime went into an employee’s pocket, nor did Blunt personally benefit from any expenditure.
2. His agency paid $8,000 to an employee, David Spencer, for sick pay when he was not apparently sick, and it also failed to collect $7,000 from Spencer when he left prior to the end of his employment agreement. The $7000 was for moving expenses incurred that prosecutors felt Spencer owed the state. Blunt’s position was that the agency was not entitled to collect these funds, since Spencer’s departure was not voluntary.
All told, the state prosecuted Sandy Blunt, and he is now a convicted felon for “misspending” $26,000 of government money.
No one has ever alleged that Blunt personally benefited from any of these expenditures. Blunt was acting like other capable, ethical North Dakota executives ‐ in the best interest of customers and of the mission of his employer. In our industry it is considered a best practice to provide employees and supervisors with incentives. It is not frivolous, it's necessary, and what every employer should do.
The first of these two charges would be, to many people, laughable if it were not for the damaging consequences associated with them. The notion that buying inexpensive incentive items for your employees could result in a felony conviction is simply stunning. This would not be elevated to a criminal status in most states in the nation. The fact that it is in North Dakota should have a chilling effect on businesses looking to move there.
The second and more serious charge, involving the sick pay and moving expenses of employee Spencer, has been fatally undermined by the revelation that the prosecutor in the matter, Cynthia Feland, withheld critical evidence from the defense – evidence that largely clears Blunt in this area. A disciplinary panel for the North Dakota Supreme Court has found on November 7, 2011 that
“Cynthia M. Feland did not disclose to Michael Hoffman, defense attorney for Charles Blunt, the Wahl memo, and other documents which were evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tended to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigate the offense.”
Withholding of evidence by prosecutors is one of the most serious acts of prosecutorial misconduct in North Dakota and all other states. In recognition of this, the panel recommended Ms Feland’s license to practice law be suspended. We urge that you read the entire report of the panel, including the penalties the board recommended be imposed on Ms. Feland. For the report, go here.
Had the prosecutor not withheld evidence, in all likelihood the case would never have come to trial, and the reputation of Blunt and the WSI would be free of taint. The evidence in question shows that WSI’s auditor’s own findings backed Blunt’s position on payments related with Spencer. However, those findings were not made available to the defense, and the prosecutor was found to have allowed testimony to be given at the trial that directly conflicted with information she had. As we indicated, Feland, now a judge in your state, has been recommended for suspension and a fine over these findings.
Yet Sandy Blunt remains a convicted felon. His crime? Buying balloons, trinkets and $5 gift cards – for his employees, not for himself. For that, Blunt, who is married with two children, has had to spend half a decade, and untold thousands of dollars trying to clear his name.
Some of us have known Sandy for quite a while. Some have come to know him while learning of his situation. Others of us have never met Sandy, but recognize the tenuous nature of his treatment. Collectively we speak to thousands within our industry every day. Our opinions have been clear; this situation needs the light of truth shone brightly upon it. The time and resources expended prosecuting a man on such questionable grounds should be more closely examined, by the business community, workers compensation professionals and the media in North Dakota. (WCxKit)
Sandy Blunt is a good and decent man. He deserves better. So, it would seem, do the people of North Dakota.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited Prolerized New England Co. LLC, doing business as Schnitzer Northeast, for 10 alleged serious violations of workplace safety standards at its Everett recycling facility, where two workers were injured. Proposed penalties total $70,000.
According to OSHA officials, the employees were performing maintenance work inside a large rotating drum used to sort scrap material for recycling when the drum activated, injuring them. OSHA's Andover Area Office conducted an inspection in response to the September incident and identified several serious deficiencies in the facility's hazardous energy control procedures, which should ensure machines are deactivated and their power sources locked out before employees perform maintenance work.(WCxKit)
In this case, the procedures were incomplete and not clearly communicated, training was inadequate, and the procedures were not reviewed to ensure that they were effective and understood by the employees.
The inspection also found that the employees were not trained to work in confined spaces, such as the drum, and were not provided a hot work permit for welding performed in the drum. Finally, the employees were exposed to the hazard of falling into the drum through an unguarded chute opening. OSHA assessed the maximum fine of $7,000 for each of the violations, for a total of $70,000 in fines. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.
"The unexpected startup of machinery during maintenance can injure or kill workers in seconds," said Jeffrey Erskine, OSHA's area director for Essex and Middlesex counties. "Preventing this hazard requires a combination of effective hazard control procedures, training and diligence to ensure that the proper safeguards are in place, in use and understood by workers."(WCxKit)
The company has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and proposed penalties to comply, meet with OSHA's area director or contest the findings to the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
OSHA Fines Connecticut Employer for Exposing Workers to Injury
The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently cited G.A. Denison & Sons Inc. for 14 alleged willful and serious violations of workplace safety standards at an Old Lyme work site. The New London contractor faces a total of $110,000 in proposed fines, according to an OSHA report.
OSHA's enforcement action follows an inspection opened June 7, when Denison & Sons employees were observed being exposed to falls from heights of 15–26 feet while working without protection on both a scaffold and the roof of a building located at 69 Lyme St. (WCxKit)
In addition, OSHA found employees exposed to fall hazards while improperly climbing ladders and climbing ladders while carrying materials on their shoulders, as well as to head injuries from working without hard hats. These conditions resulted in citations for five willful violations carrying $73,700 in fines. A willful violation is one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law's requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health.
Nine serious violations, with $36,300 in fines, have been cited for several other hazardous conditions, including overloaded scaffolding, a lack of eye protection for employees using nail guns, inadequate scaffold access, a lack of protection against falling objects, and a failure to provide employees with fall protection, scaffold, and ladder training. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known. (WCxKit)
OSHA has placed G.A. Denison & Sons in its Severe Violator Enforcement Program, which mandates targeted follow-up inspections to ensure compliance with the law.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reports it cited American Railcar Industries. Inc., headquartered in Saint Charles, Mo., for 10 serious safety violations after an employee was electrocuted while performing repair work on a tanker-style railcar July 25 at the company's work site near Marmaduke, Ark.
"Exposing workers to electrocution hazards without proper safeguards and training is inexcusable," said Carlos Reynolds, the agency's area director in Little Rock. "It is the employer's responsibility to create a safe and healthful workplace where preventable hazards don't cost workers their lives."(WcxKitz)
Upon receiving a fatality report from the employer, OSHA's Little Rock Area Office initiated an investigation July 26 at the company's facility on Highway 34 East and found that workers were being exposed to electrical shocks from welding equipment.
The violations include failing to provide personal protection for employees conducting cutting and welding operations; properly mark the power supply and control boxes for voltage, current and wattage; use fixed wiring instead of flexible cords and protect the wiring from possible damage; remove defective electrical equipment from service; and inspect and mark web slings. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known. Proposed penalties total $61,400
American Railcar Industries, which employs about 260 workers at the Marmaduke facility and about 1,500 workers nationwide, designs and manufactures railcars.(WcxKitz)
The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA's area director in Little Rock or contest the citations and penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
Pennsylvania Employer Fined for Exposing Workers to Hazards
The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently cited QG LLC for eight serious violations of the process safety management standards at its Atglen facility in response to an employee complaint. Proposed penalties total $54,000.
"Process safety management prevents the unexpected release of toxic, reactive or flammable liquids and gases in processes involving highly hazardous chemicals," said Albert D'Imperio, OSHA's area director in Philadelphia. "It's vital that QG ensure safeguards are in place to protect the safety of workers at this facility." (WCxKit)
The serious citations issued for the process safety management standard violations include failing to provide information pertaining to the equipment being used, establish written operating procedures and safe work practices, conduct employee training, conduct a pre-start up safety review, implement written procedures for ongoing integrity, develop procedures for management of change, certify that compliance was evaluated at least every three years, and ensure that installations of equipment in hazardous locations were intrinsically safe or approved for the hazardous location.
A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.
Headquartered in North Haven, Conn., QG LLC is a web offset printing company with approximately 240 employees at its Atglen site. (WCxKit)
The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations to comply, ask for an informal conference with OSHA's area director or contest the citations and proposed penalties before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2012 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact us at: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
A Midland County, Texas jury found Winkler County Sheriff Robert Roberts guilty of misuse of official information, retaliation, and official oppression.
According to the Texas Attorney General’s Office, the guilty verdict stems from the sheriff's attempt to retaliate against two nurses in Kermit, Texas, who filed anonymous complaints against Dr. Rolando Arafiles Jr., a physician who worked with both victims at the Winkler County Memorial Hospital. (WCxKit)
In an agreement reached at the close of the trial's punishment phase, Roberts, 56, was sentenced to four years felony probation on two counts each of misuse of official information and retaliation. He will serve 100 days in jail on each of four felony counts, to be served concurrently, and pay a $6,000 fine on four felony and two misdemeanor counts. Roberts will be removed from office by operation of law and will surrender his peace officer's license.
Sheriff Roberts was indicted on two counts each of misuse of official information, retaliation, and official oppression. Dr. Arafiles and County Attorney Scott Tidwell were also indicted on similar charges. Former hospital administrator Stan Wiley pleaded guilty to related charges after he acknowledged improperly terminating the nurses employment after they filed formal complaints against Arafiles with the Texas Medical Board. Under the terms of his guilty plea, Wiley was sentenced to 30 days in the county jail.
According to prosecutors with the Texas Attorney General's Office, the sheriff improperly used his position as the county's chief law enforcement official in order to help his friend, Dr. Arafiles, retaliate against the nurse’s for complaining to the Texas Medical Board about his professional conduct. Under Texas law, complaints filed against physicians with the Texas Medical Board are confidential. However, after Dr. Arafiles was notified about the complaints filed against him, Sheriff Roberts requested copies of the confidential complaints, which included the complainant’s names.
During the trial, Assistant Attorney General David Glickler explained to jurors that Sheriff Roberts improperly shared the confidential complaints with Dr. Arafiles and the hospital administrator. Subsequently, the sheriff executed a search warrant in order to obtain information stored on the nurse’s computers and confirm that the nurses were the source of the confidential complaints.
The nurses were improperly terminated in retaliation for complaining to the Texas Medical Board about Dr. Arafiles conduct. County Attorney Tidwell's office sought the nurse’s indictment and the Winkler County Sheriff's Department arrested the nurses for alleged criminal conduct they did not commit. A jury later acquitted one of the nurse’s, while charges against the other nurse were dropped by the prosecution. (WCxKit)
Dr. Arafiles and County Attorney Tidwell are still awaiting trial on retaliation and misuse of official information charges.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com
A Corrections Officer from New York Mills is facing fraud charges after authorities say he wrongfully collected workers compensation benefits from the State, according to information from the New York State Police.
The police noted that Frank Caporale, 43, of New York Mills was charged with first-degree offering a false instrument for filing and fraudulent practices, both felonies.
Caporale, a New York State Corrections Officer at Midstate Correctional Facility, allegedly submitted written statements that contained materially false information to the New York State Insurance Fund as part of a claim for payment.
According to State Police, the statements indicated that Caporale was not employed, when he in fact was working a second job. As a result of these filings, the defendant did wrongfully collect $10,540 in workers comp benefits from the State Insurance Fund.
Caporale was subsequently given appearance tickets returnable in the Town of Marcy Justice Court.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
LexisNexis Workers Compensation Law Community directed by attorney
Robin Kobayashi recently teamed up with Work Comp Roundup to deliver expert opinions on the 10 most critical myths and facts about workers compensation.
The article goes into depth on the following 10 myths, in no particular order:
Myth #1: Large discount networks are the key to success in workers compensation managed care – from
Kenneth F. Martino, president and CEO of Broadspire Services, Inc.
Myth #3: Workers compensation claims improve with age, by
Mark Walls, assistant vice president of claims at Safety National.
Myth #4: Technology will cure all of our ills, from
Robert Wilson, president & CEO of WorkersCompensation.com, LLC.
Myth #5: Because FECA is so different from state workers compensation systems, private sector case management best practices won’t work, contributed by
Marianne Cloeren, MD, MPH, FACOEM, and medical director of Managed Care Advisors, Inc.
Myth #8: Doctors prescribe narcotic pain medications because of concerns they may be sued if they don’t treat pain from
Stuart D. Colburn, Esq., shareholder in Downs Stanford, P.C.
Remember, these are all MYTHS! The
article itself goes into depth explaining why they are not FACTS. Work Comp Roundup considers it required reading for everyone in the field – it’s a great way to start the new year.
Author Rebecca Shafer, JD, President of Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. is a national expert in the field of workers compensation. She is a writer, speaker, and publisher. Her expertise is working with employers to reduce workers compensation costs, and her clients include airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality, and manufacturing. She is the author of the #1 selling book on cost containment, Workers Compensation Management Program: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%. Contact: RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contactInfo@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
|
Here are five reasons to file a Declaration of Readiness to proceed (DOR)
1. You will resolve an issue. Whether you file a DOR only on one issue, for example AOE/COE, or on all issues, including the nature and extent of injuries, temporary disability, and permanent disability, a hearing on the issue will normally resolve the issue.
2. You will reduce administrative and legal costs. Every day a file is open, administrative and legal costs increase. Vendors can be vultures, picking away profit from employers and carriers.
3. The sooner you file a DOR, the less evidence applicant will have to prove his or her case. And it is the applicant's burden, not the employer's burden, to prove issues such as industrial causation, nature and extent of injuries, temporary disability, and permanent disability.
4. You will send a signal to applicant attorneys that you are not afraid to take an issue to trial, giving you additional negotiation leverage in the current and future cases.
5. Trials are free! You will not get a bill from the trial judge or court reporter.
Caution: The decision to file a DOR should be made on a case-by-case basis depending on the issues and nature of discovery completed; in some cases additional discovery should be completed before filing a DOR.
|
California Attorney: Albert A. Navarra is a practicing lawyer from Newport Beach, CA, a Board Certified Specialist in Workers Compensation law, and a partner at Sapra & Navarra, LLP. Navarra is a frequent speaker about workers compensation issues, and has represented employers in the area of workers compensation for over 10 years. He is also an expert in constitutional law, the author of The Elements of Constitutional Law, and a frequent guest on radio stations across the country. He can be reached at: (866) 384-4891 or Albert@snworkcomp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
The killing of a convenience store employee in Saskatchewan in June has spurred the provincial labor federation to support a petition to change regulations for retail employees working alone, according to a report from the Canadian OH&S News.
Many delegates attending the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour's (SFL) annual Occupational Health and Safety Conference recently strongly supported and signed a petition calling for the introduction of "Jimmy's Law" into the provincial legislature, says Larry Hubich, president of the SFL. The proposed law is named after Jimmy Wiebe, who was murdered at a gas station convenience store on June 20 in Yorkton. (WCxKit)
It would require employers to schedule two employees to work together between the hours of 10 or 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. or provide protective barriers between lone workers and the public.
The incident that prompted the petition occurred in the early morning hours. Members of the Yorkton RCMP received a report of a man who had been found deceased in the Shell Canada convenience store by a customer, says Corporal Rob King, a spokesman for the Saskatchewan RCMP division. Four days after, King says, the Yorkton RCMP detachment charged Kyle Furness, 20, with first-degree murder in connection with the homicide of the 50-year-old worker, an employee of the store for more than 10 years.
Jimmy's Law is modeled after similar working alone regulations in British Columbia which were introduced in 2008, but have not yet come into effect because of the complexity of the issue, according to Megan Johnston, a spokeswoman for WorkSafeBC. That year, however, BC introduced a separate pay-then-pump requirement following the death of a young gas station attendant.
"Grant's Law" – named after Grant De Patie, who was dragged to his death while trying to prevent the theft of gas from a station in Maple Ridge, BC – requires mandatory pre-payment of fuel at all gas stations in BC, Johnston says.
Wayne Hoskins, president of the Western Convenience Stores Association (WCSA) in Surrey, BC, says it's important to note the distinction between mandatory pre-payment of gas and the requirement for multiple workers or barriers. "While Grant's Law was well-intended, it refers to outside, or ex-store, and not in-store coverage," Hoskins explains.
In British Columbia, the working alone regulations – known as the Late Night Retail Safety Procedures and Requirements – consist of an engineering control (barrier) or administrative control (extra staff), Johnston says. Hoskins says that a third option has also been proposed: additional training, testing and certification. This option, a combination of both engineering and administrative controls, will be presented to WorkSafeBC's board of directors in October. (WCxKit)
Ontario is another jurisdiction considering a mandatory pre-paid policy for gas stations following a recent gas-and-dash incident. A gas attendant Hashem Rad, 62, was struck by a vehicle that took off with unpaid gas at a Petro-Canada station in Mississauga, Ontario. Rad was taken to hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries the following day.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
A Western Sydney manufacturing company and its director were recently fined a total of $127,400 and ordered to pay WorkCover’s legal costs after a high powered industrial blender was turned on with a man inside it.
According to a report from the WorkCover Authority, FIP Brakes International (FIP) produces industrial sized brake pads, as well as other products, for trains and other railway vehicles and employs around 60 people mainly based at its facility in Wetherill Park. Its managing director is Chris Katakouzinos. (WCxKit)
A machine operator was killed when he was cleaning out an industrial blender at FIP’s premises.
The power to the machine had not been isolated and the machine became operational with the worker still inside. He died at the site with extensive crush injuries and lacerations.
A WorkCover investigation found a significant number of safety failings:
1. The machine should not have been able to operate while its front
doors were open.
2. The safety switches were either broken or malfunctioning.
3. The machine’s electrical power supply had not been turned off.
4. The machine operator should not have been working alone.
5. The machine was not properly maintained.
6. The operator was not given proper training.
In handing down her finding in the Industrial Court, Justice Backman said the incident was foreseeable and that there were serious deficiencies in the company’s systems. (WCxKit)
They both pleaded guilty. FIP was fined $117,000 and Mr. Katakouzinos $10,400. The court ordered them to pay WorkCover’s legal costs.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
A Los Angeles area metal shredding facility accused of releasing toxic substances into the atmosphere has agreed to pay more than $2.93 million to comply with air pollution laws and to settle an environmental protection lawsuit, according to a report from the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office.
Deputy District Attorney Daniel Wright of the Environmental Law Section said SA Recycling, LLC – an automobile and appliance shredding company – agreed to the settlement, which was signed by Los Superior Court Judge Debre K. Weintraub. The civil lawsuit and settlement were filed last week. (WCxKit)
The action alleged that SA Recycling violated air pollution laws when an explosion at its San Pedro facility at Terminal Island destroyed its air pollution control system in May 2007 and the company continued operating for weeks without proper equipment.
At the time of the violations, the company was operated by Hugo Neu Corp. SA Recycling purchased the company in September 2007.
The injunction permanently enjoins SA Recycling from operating its San Pedro shredder without a fully functioning air pollution control system.
Under the terms of the stipulated judgment, SA Recycling has agreed to install an air pollution control system to minimize emissions at its San Pedro location and two other sites in Orange and Kern counties. The company also has agreed to work closely with state and local regulators to address compliance issues related to its operations.
SA Recycling must additionally pay $260,000 in civil penalties and investigative costs to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office and $430,000 to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for investigative expenses and enforcement tools.
Among others who will benefit are the College of Engineering at the University of California, Davis, slated to receive $100,000 to support aerosol studies; the Coalition For A Safe Environment, which will receive $75,000 for select projects; and 11 San Pedro Bay marina owners and operators, who will share $165,000 to target water and sediment pollution sources. (WCxKit)
SA Recycling shreds and sorts recyclable metal materials. The process, ultimately, generates auto shredder residue (ASR) which is treated to reduce solubility of any remaining metals.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com.
Posted in
Employment Law Issues, Fraud and Abuse, Insurance Issues, Rates, Premiums, Legal Doctrines |
