• MSN
  • Hotmail
  • More
    • Autos
    • My MSN
    • Video
    • Careers & Jobs
    • Personals
    • Weather
    • Delish
    • Quotes
    • White Pages
    • Games
    • Real Estate
    • Wonderwall
    • Horoscopes
    • Shopping
    • Yellow Pages
    • Local Edition
    • Traffic
    • Feedback
    • Maps & Directions
    • Travel
    • Full MSN Index
  • Bing
  • NBCNews.com
  • TODAY
  • Nightly News
  • Rock Center
  • Meet the Press
  • Dateline
  • msnbc
  • Breaking News
  • Newsvine
  • Home
  • US
  • World
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • Tech
  • Science
  • Travel
  • Local
  • Weather
Advertise | AdChoices
  • Recommended: Bomb plot briefing may undercut DOJ's case for AP records seizure
  • Recommended: AP, DOJ clash over seriousness of leak that prompted phone records seizure
  • Recommended: IRS mishandling of Tea Party reviews still unresolved, audit charges
  • Recommended: The case of the missing mustangs; what happened to 1,700 wild horses?

Investigative reporting from NBC News, with your story ideas and documents. Share your ideas. Read about this blog. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

  • ↓ About this blog
  • ↓ Archives
    • Icons Email E-mail updates
    • Icons Twitter Follow on Twitter
    • Icons Feed Subscribe to RSS
  • 2
    days
    ago

    Power tool industry resists table saw technology that could save digits

    By NBC News staff

    Table saws are the tool of choice for millions of construction workers and do-it-yourselfers, which explains why they maim so many people in the U.S. – more than 67,000 a year, according to government estimates.

    That number might be much lower, if saw manufacturers adopted a technology known as SawStop, which uses a weak electrical current run through the saw blade to detect when it comes in contact with a person, then almost instantaneously stops it .


    Follow @openchannelblog

    But as FairWarning.org reports, power tool manufacturers and trade groups have opposed efforts to require SawStop or similar technology on table saws, arguing that the injury numbers have been inflated and that the government’s estimate of $2.36 billion in annual costs to society from table saw accidents is exaggerated. They also say that requiring such industry-reduction systems would destroy the market for popular lightweight saws, which cost as little as $100.

    The resistance to the digit-saving technology “highlights the endless due process that makes it virtually impossible for regulators to enact safety measures over the unified objections of industry,” FairWarning’s Myron Levin writes in an eye-opening examination of the behind-the-scenes battle.

    Click here to read the full report and see a video demonstration of the SawStop in action.

    More from Open Channel:

    • Lax state rules provide cover for sponsors of attack ads
    • Dzhokhar Tsarnaev scribbled note inside boat where he was hiding
    • Bomb plot briefing may undercut DOJ's case for AP records seizure

    Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook 

     

    Comment

    Show more
    Explore related topics: accident, safety, injury, construction, workplace, table-saws
  • 18
    Apr
    2013
    6:31am, EDT

    Chemical industry watchdog falls years behind on safety reports for deadly accidents

    Eric Risberg / AP file

    Smoke pours from a fire at the Chevron Richmond Refinery, seen behind Alcatraz Island in San Francisco, on Aug. 6. Chemical Safety Board officials say their response to that incident delayed work on reports about other accidents.

    By Jim Morris and Chris Hamby, Center for Public Integrity

    On April 2, 2010, an explosion at the Tesoro Corp. oil refinery in Anacortes, Wash., killed five workers instantly and severely burned two others, who succumbed to their wounds.


    Follow @openchannelblog

    Eighteen days later, the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig blew up in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers and unleashing a massive oil spill.

    In both cases, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board – an independent agency modeled after the National Transportation Safety Board – launched investigations. Like the NTSB, the Chemical Safety Board is supposed to follow such probes with recommendations aimed at preventing similar tragedies.

    Yet three years after Tesoro and Deepwater Horizon, both inquiries remain open – exemplars of a chemical board under attack for what critics call its sluggish investigative pace and short attention span.

    The number of board accident reports, case studies and safety bulletins has fallen precipitously since 2006, an analysis by the Center for Public Integrity found. Thirteen board investigations – one more than five years old – are incomplete.

    “It is unacceptable that after three long years, the CSB has failed to complete its investigation of the tragic Tesoro refinery accident,” Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said in a written statement to the Center. “The families of the seven victims and the Anacortes community deserve better, and the CSB must be held accountable for this ridiculous delay.”

    “I think they’re making excuses,” said Shauna Gumbel, whose son, Matt, died 22 days after being burned in the blast. “Why aren’t they assigning more people so they can get the investigation done in a timely manner and the families can move forward?”

    Ted S. Warren / AP file

    Security guards staff a gate at a Tesoro Corp. refinery in Anacortes, Wash., on April 2, 2010, after a fatal explosion and fire.

    Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso and managing director Daniel Horowitz say the board, which has a $10.55 million annual budget, is stretched thin.

    “We’ve made innumerable proposals over the years … pointing out the significant discrepancy between the number of serious accidents and the ones that we can handle from a practical standpoint,” Horowitz said. Congress, he said, has been unwilling to come up with more money.

    Getting sidetracked
    Moure-Eraso, chairman since June 2010, said the Tesoro investigation was sidetracked by an explosion at the Chevron refinery in Richmond, Calif., last August that created a towering black cloud and prompted about 15,000 people in surrounding neighborhoods to seek medical evaluation.

    “We decided that it was important to deploy (to Richmond) because the issues that were raised were issues that affect the whole refinery industry,” Moure-Eraso said.

    Current and former board members and staffers, however, contend the agency’s investigations are poorly managed – an allegation the Environmental Protection Agency’s inspector general is exploring.

    Former board member William Wark, whose five-year term ended in September 2011, said it’s “embarrassing” that the Tesoro investigation has not been finished. “The basic, bottom line is the agency is grossly mismanaged,” he said.

    The board has 20 investigators – four more than it had in 2008. Yet earlier investigations were often completed more quickly.

    The deadliest accident the board has investigated was the March 2005 explosion at the BP refinery in Texas City, Texas. Fifteen workers were killed and 180 injured. The board’s final report was issued just under two years after the accident.

    Stephen Morton / AP file

    The Imperial Sugar Co. plant on the Savannah River in Port Wentworth, Ga., is seen Feb. 8, 2008, a day after an explosion and fire there killed 14 people.

    A February 2008 blast at the Imperial Sugar plant near Savannah, Ga., killed 14 and injured 36. The final report was issued in 19 months.

    Gerald Poje, a Bill Clinton appointee who served on the board from 1998 to 2004, said he finds it “painful” that more recent investigations have stagnated. “Unfortunately, over  time, people begin to forget and feel less obligated to pay attention to recommendations,” Poje said.

    Falling productivity
    Created by Congress in amendments to the Clean Air Act in 1990, the Chemical Safety Board was starved of funding and didn’t get up and running until 1998.

    Authorized for five members, the board currently has three, with a fourth awaiting confirmation. Its staff numbers 39.

    The board appeared to hit its stride under Carolyn Merritt, a George W. Bush appointee who served as chair from 2002 to 2007 and died of cancer in 2008.

    In 2006 it released nine products – three full reports, three case studies and three safety bulletins. In 2007 it put out eight, including a 341-page report on the BP-Texas City explosion.

    Production has trended down ever since. Last year, the board released two case studies. So far this year, it has issued one full report, one interim report – on Chevron – and one case study.

    “Would we like to do more? Would we like to do it faster? Sure,” Horowitz said, adding that he expects the Tesoro investigation to be completed by the end of this year.

    The United Steelworkers union, which represents workers in refineries, chemical plants and other hazardous settings, has been among the board’s more vocal critics.

    At a public meeting in January, Steelworkers health, safety and environment director Mike Wright said investigative delays “severely compromise the board’s mission,” adding, “This is a management problem.”

    U.S. Coast Guard / Reuters file

    Fire crews battle the blaze aboard the oil rig Deepwater Horizon off Louisiana on April 21, 2010. Three years later, there is still no report by the Chemical Safety Board on the disaster.

    The EPA’s inspector general is looking into this very subject. In May 2012, the IG notified Moure-Eraso that it planned an audit “to determine whether CSB’s investigative process can be more efficient to enable more investigative work.”

    “We are kind of full-time employment device for the IG,” Moure-Eraso said. “I don’t think that they are competent to basically understand how we work or understand how we conduct investigations.”

    Choosing targets
    The board’s choice of investigative targets has been a point of contention.

    Why, the Steelworkers ask, did the board follow up on an ink plant explosion in East Rutherford, N.J., that injured seven workers last October but not a hydrofluoric acid release that killed a union member in December at the Valero Energy Corp. refinery in Memphis?

    Hydrofluoric acid, a highly toxic gas, is used at about 50 U.S. refineries. The union thought the Valero accident afforded a “golden opportunity” for the board to reinforce the need for “inherently safer technologies,” said Kim Nibarger, a union health and safety specialist. “They said they were too busy.”

    Horowitz said the board was asked to go to New Jersey by one of the state’s senators, Frank Lautenberg. No one in the Tennessee congressional delegation urged the board to look into Valero.

    “We screen (accidents) very carefully,” Horowitz said. “We look at the specific consequences – the number of deaths and injuries and things like that, the number of community evacuations. We look at qualitative factors, one of which is requests from Congress and from our authorizing committees to investigate these issues.”

    Debate continues over whether the board should have investigated the Deepwater Horizon accident, already addressed in at least a half-dozen other federal inquiries, including one by a presidential commission.

    Former board members Wark and William Wright, both appointed by George W. Bush, said they argued against it. “It was offshore. It was something that we had absolutely no business being in,” Wark said.

    “I don’t think there’s anything they’re going to say that’s going to improve offshore drilling right now,” said Wright, whose term expired the same day as Wark’s in 2011.

    Horowitz pointed out that the board, then chaired by John Bresland, was asked to investigate the disaster in early June 2010 by Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Bart Stupak, D-Mich. Bresland agreed. Moure-Eraso assumed the chairmanship days later, having been handed a record-high caseload. 

    “We told Congress at that time that we needed additional resources to conduct that work,” Horowitz said. “Well, those resources were never provided.”

    Nonetheless, Horowitz said, the investigation -- which has cost nearly $4 million and should be completed this summer -- was worth doing.

    “We’re the agency that’s going to look in detail and depth at industry standards,” he said. “The presidential oil spill commission took the 30,000-foot view, wrote a good report, but looked in broad strokes.”

    This story was originally published in a longer form by The Center for Public Integrity. Click here to read it in its entirety.

    The Center for Public Integrity is a nonprofit, non-partisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C. For more of its stories on this to go publicintegrity.org.

    More from Open Channel:

    • Boston Marathon attack: Bomb-Making 101 available online
    • Inside a bomb investigation: the hunt for forensic clues
    • Anti-immigrant groups go on attack to block 'pathway to citizenship'

    Investigate this!

    Read and vote on readers' story tips and suggested topics for investigation or submit your own.

    98 comments

    No one wants to pay for anything, but expect that somehow trillion dollar industries are somehow magically going to be monitored on a shoestring. And when things to wrong, well, don't face facts that we can't be sure we are safe unless we are willing to provide the watchdogs with proper resources.

    Show more
    Explore related topics: safety, chemical, featured, inspection, cpi, center-for-public-integrity, chemical-safety-board
  • 19
    Feb
    2013
    4:46am, EST

    Lights, cameras, reaction: Resistance builds against red-light cameras

    Currently 21 states and Washington, D.C., use automated cameras at traffic intersections to catch violations such as running through red lights and stopping over white lines. While the cameras bring in thousands of extra dollars, drivers and some government officials argue they are inaccurate and rip people off. NBC's Tom Costello reports.

    By Lisa Riordan Seville and Hannah Rappleye
    NBC News

    Drivers dread it -- that flash as they try to speed through a yellow traffic light. It’s a red light camera, and a signal that a ticket is on the way.

    A rarity 15 years ago, red light cameras have become ubiquitous in many U.S. cities. Communities in 24 states and Washington, D.C., now use the cameras to try to decrease illegal -- and sometimes deadly -- traffic violations. Supporters say it’s worked.

    "In the last five years we went from 54 traffic fatalities to 19,” said Cathy Lanier, police chief in Washington, D.C., which began using the cameras in 1999. “I mean, that's dramatic!”

    Red light cameras are one piece of a growing network of automated traffic enforcement. Cameras now monitor speed, bus and high-occupancy-vehicle lanes and intersections with stop signs. Proponents like Lanier say they help to deter accidents, nab violators and allow states and municipalities to keep an eye on the roads for less.


    But critics of red light programs worry about the Big Brother aspect of using cameras instead of cops. Many also say cameras, which are generally run by private companies, have spread not because they make streets safer, but because they mean profit for cities and companies.

    “What the issue really comes down to is these companies are ripping people off by hundreds of millions of dollars, in the name of caring about our safety and our health and our kids,” said New Jersey Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon, who has introduced anti-red light camera legislation to the state Legislature.

    Recent news stories have fueled opposition. In Chicago, an alleged pay-to-play scandal led the mayor to ban one company from bidding for future contracts. Millions were spent on pro-camera lobbying in Florida and other states. In Iowa, doubts about the constitutionality of using cameras as traffic enforcers led a state senator to introduce a bill to ban red-light cameras – a move already taken by at least nine other states.

    What does science say?
    Red light violations were associated with some 700 deaths and nearly 90,000 injuries in 2009, according to a study based on data reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatalities and injuries have decreased in recent years, the study shows.

    Researchers, however, are divided on how much red light cameras increase safety.

    Charlie Neibergall / AP file

    Traffic passes a red light camera at an intersection in Clive, Iowa.

    In 2011, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research group funded by the insurance industry, released a study that found red light cameras decreased fatal accidents by an estimated 24 percent in large cities that use them.

    But a 2005 Federal Highway Administration study painted a more nuanced picture. Data from seven jurisdictions showed a decrease in front-into-side crashes at intersections with cameras. But it also showed an increase in rear-end crashes. The researchers said that apparently was the result of drivers hitting the brakes to avoid a ticket. Overall, however, the research showed the cameras saved money by both decreasing the most serious accidents, and generating revenue.

    However, the FHA says that red light cameras shouldn’t be a knee-jerk traffic enforcement option. The agency issued a number of recommendations regarding the implementation of red light cameras, saying cameras should be considered only after engineering solutions have failed in problem intersections. Among the possible solutions, it says: Give drivers more cushion. Increasing yellow time by one second, it found, can result in a 40 percent decrease in crashes in stoplight-controlled intersections.

    “It all hinges on proper yellow light time,” said John Bowman, communications director of the National Motorists Association, a drivers advocacy group. “If yellow lights are set properly, based on established traffic engineering, red light cameras are unnecessary because you almost automatically have low numbers of violations and low numbers of accidents. If you shorten those yellow light times beyond bare minimums, that’s when you start to generate more accidents and more violations.”

    Problematic cameras
    A yellow light in Cary, N.C., had Howard Bond seeing red.

    Last year Bond’s son was issued two different tickets for turning left on a red light at an intersection. But when Bond watched videotape of the alleged traffic offenses, he saw that in both instances his son had legally turned left on a flashing yellow light. The town had recently switched to a flashing yellow at the intersection, but Redflex, the private company running the cameras, kept treating it as a red, Bond said.

    Each time, Bond, who lives in nearby Chatham County, went to the office that issued the tickets to complain. Each time, he said, his tickets were dismissed but the larger issue was ignored.

    "I just basically stood there and said, ‘No sir, you’re going to look at the video,’” Bond told NBC News. But law enforcement officials told him he would have to attend a hearing to contest it.

    "I said 'We’re not going through all that,'” Bond said. “He started hee-hawing around. Then he looked at the video and said, ‘This is wrong.’"

    After a local television news station approached town officials with Bond’s tickets, details emerged about tens of other tickets wrongfully issued in Cary by faulty red light cameras last year. A review of its red light cameras found that cameras in one intersection had generated at least 31 false violations, many of which led to $50 tickets.

    Town officials told the Raleigh News and Observer that Redflex had failed to report the error to the town. 

    But Jody Ryan, spokesperson for Redflex, said the company took action as soon as it discovered the wrongful tickets.

    “In this situation, changes were made by the Town of Cary to the traffic light phases without Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. knowledge,” Ryan said. “Because we were unaware of these changes, our systems triggered a set of false positives.  Once we were notified of the issue Redflex either dismissed or refunded all the affected citations on behalf of the Town of Cary.”

    While major cities can make millions off red light cameras, in some contracts red light camera companies keep the majority of funds paid by violators. Redflex’s contract with Cary, for instance, allowed the company to keep 88 percent of the money generated by red-light camera tickets in Cary. Between April 2004 and July 2012, ticketed drivers paid $5.7 million to the company, and $646,000 to the Wake County Public School System, which received the city’s proceeds.

    The controversy led town officials to abandon its red-light camera program altogether.


    Follow @openchannelblog

    Cary is one of a number of communities, including large cities such as Houston, that have recently abandoned their camera programs amid opposition from residents.

    Dollars and cents
    About 700 municipalities in the country have cameras. One of the most prominent companies, Redflex, had about 2,000 cameras in operation around the nation in 2011, bringing in over $92 million in revenue, according to its annual report. American Traffic Solutions, another big player in the industry, reports more than 3,000 road safety systems installed in the U.S. and Canada, which include red light cameras.

    Red light cameras can also pull in big revenues for cities. An investigation by NBC 4 in Washington, D.C., found the Capitol region drivers received tickets with at least $18 million dollars in fines in one year attributable to the cameras. NBC 5 in Dallas found a single camera in Arlington, Texas, generated $2.5 million over four years.

    NBCDFW.com: Red light cameras make millions

    Communities continue to adopt the technology. In 2011, East Cleveland residents voted to keep red light cameras. Last year, New Jersey’s Pohatcong Township voted to extend its contract with Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions.

    “The bottom line is that those who oppose cameras are the minority,” said Charles Territo, spokesperson for American Traffic Solutions. He added that American Traffic Solutions doesn’t issue tickets: a police officer reviews each image before issuing a violation. According to ATS, about 50 percent of traffic “events” each year are rejected before a violation is issued.

    “The majority of voters around the country know the dangers of red light running,” Territo said. “Nobody likes to get a ticket, but cameras are used in a number of places around the country and the world. They’re used to help police officers do their job.”

    But cameras have faced increasing opposition from drivers who object to the automated systems for many reasons, including the inability to confront their accuser in court. Facing pressure from constituents, local and state politicians in Iowa, Florida, New Jersey and other states have recently introduced measures to change or end the camera programs.

    Other controversies have raised questions about red light cameras. Problems with short yellow lights, which may increase the number of tickets issued, have surfaced in cities from California to Tennessee. Judges in Baltimore have castigated the city and thrown out tickets after finding the city had shortened yellow lights below recommended limits. Last summer, the New Jersey Transportation Department ordered 21 red light programs suspended after finding yellow-light timing issues. Meanwhile, camera companies have sued, or threatened to sue, cities who back out of contracts. And they’ve been investigated for possible pay-to-play schemes with local governments. 

    “They’re very aggressive in terms of lobbying for favorable legislation or favorable court cases,” said Bowman of the National Motorists Association. “It’s big business, and there’s a lot of money at stake.”

    Last October, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel barred Redflex from re-bidding on the city’s red-light camera contract after a Chicago Tribune investigation found that Redflex company executives and lobbyists had paid for hotel rooms and spent thousands on entertainment for the city official overseeing the red light program.

    Chicago’s red light cameras raised big revenues for the city. Redflex has operated a red-light program in the city since 2003, generating about $300 million in fines for the city and $97 million in revenue for itself. Redflex. Residents in the city have long complained about discrepancies between yellow light times in the city and its suburbs.

    “We authorized an internal investigation and, though the inquiry is not complete, have learned that some Redflex employees did not meet our own code of conduct and the standards that the people of the City of Chicago deserve,” said Ryan, Redflex spokesperson, of the Chicago case. “We will take corrective action and make additional information public.”

    Automated traffic enforcement companies spend millions persuading local and state lawmakers to expand programs, using lobbyists, municipal partners and nonprofits to advance the cause. After spending $1.5 million lobbying Florida lawmakers over four years, American Traffic Solutions became the main-red light camera supplier in the state, winning contracts in more than 65 cities.

    Territo, the spokesperson for American Traffic Solutions, defended efforts to expand red light camera programs, which he emphasized are above all about safety. “Just as opponents of red-light safety cameras fund efforts to remove cameras, we expend resources on efforts to defend them,” he said.

    Recognizing growing opposition to red light enforcement technologies, companies are looking to new markets. Both Redflex and American Traffic Solutions have active speed cameras in various markets, though 12 states have banned the technology. Both companies have also started programs to enforce rules prohibiting drivers from going around stopped school buses.

    Redflex recently became the nation’s largest provider of school bus arm cameras, which catch drivers who speed past the stop signs that swing out from the side of school buses. The company has launched 10 pilot programs in six states. 

    More from Open Channel:

    • Suburban Chicago cops allowed to work 'half drunk,' investigation shows
    • GAO: Climate change poses big financial risk to federal government
    • Death takes no holiday: Tracking gun violence over one long January weekend

    Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook 

     

    930 comments

    It has nothing to do with safety but MONEY! As most Americans are struggling to get by in this depression the states need to feed massive spending habits.

    Show more
    Explore related topics: red, safety, cameras, traffic, light, transportation, featured
  • 13
    Dec
    2012
    7:44am, EST

    Rossen Reports: TV and furniture tipovers threaten kids

    Flat-screen TVs are falling in price, which means that many will be buying them over the holidays, but new numbers are showing more kids than ever are being injured and even killed by falling TVs and other heavy furniture. NBC's Jeff Rossen reports on how you can keep your kids safe.

     

    By Jeff Rossen and Josh Davis
    NBC News

    A safety alert for parents this holiday season: The popular gift with a hidden danger that's hurting — even killing — children.

    We're talking about TVs. Flatscreens are dropping in price, which means many of us are out there buying them. Who would ever think they're dangerous?

    Read: Statement in response to TV tipover report

    But now, exclusive new numbers that every parent should see: More kids than ever are being killed from TVs and furniture falling on top of them, with a child being rushed to the hospital every 45 minutes. There's a simple thing you can do right now to prevent this.

    It's a nightmare becoming so common that safety experts and the federal government are issuing new warnings today. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, 37 kids were killed from TV, furniture and appliance tipovers last year alone — up a shocking 37 percent. Another 23,400 children were rushed to emergency rooms.

    Rossen Reports: More kids getting hurt in bounce houses

    We asked Kate Carr, president of the watchdog group Safe Kids: "How does this happen?"

    She told us that flatscreen TVs tend to be "top-heavy with a narrow base. Small kids are very curious about TVs; they want to get them on. They come over, they grab them, it wobbles, and it falls right over on the child."

    Carr said many parents keep flatscreens on stands — an invitation to danger. And now there's a new problem: With flatscreen TVs so popular, what to do with that old tube TV?

    "A lot of people taking their old TVs, moving them into basements or kids' bedrooms," we pointed out.

    "That's right," Carr said. "And they're up on a high dresser. And kids reach for the remote, climb up on a drawer, pull the drawer out... and there it goes."

    Rossen Reports: Carbon monoxide endangers schoolchildren

    The impact, studies show, is the same as a baby falling from a 10th-story window. It happened to 2-year-old Chance Bowles, no match for her TV.

    "The last thing she said to me was 'I love you, Mama,' and that was it," Chance's mother, Keisha Bowles, told us. She was in the next room when her cute little girl pulled out the drawers and climbed up on a dresser. In just seconds it all came down.

    "That's the last time I saw my child alive," Keisha Bowles said. "She was lying on the floor unconscious because the TV fell on her."

    So how do you protect your kids? Flatscreens should always be mounted on the wall, secure. At the very least, experts say, buy a special strap and attach your TV and dresser to the wall. Those straps cost less than $20.

    Rossen Reports: Many backyard decks collapse, experts warn

    "We don't want you to take the chance on losing your baby, like we did ours," Keisha Bowles said.

    The TV manufacturer's group told us it's committed to safety, and consumers should always properly secure their TVs. Here's another thing you can do at home right now: A lot of us keep our wallets, cell phones, the remote or toys on top of dressers — bad idea. Keep that top surface clear of anything your kids would want to get a hold of.

    Flatscreens look light, but they can weigh up to 50 pounds or more. And a new report by Safe Kids says the reason most parents don't hang flatscreen TVs on the wall is because they're worried about damaging the wall.

    For more safety tips about securing TVs and furniture in your home, click here.

    More from Rossen Reports:

    Have an idea for Rossen Reports? Email us by clicking here!

    Read more investigative journalism from Rossen Reports

    Rossen Reports: Are online hotel prices fixed?

    Rossen Reports: Extreme identity thieves live as you

     

    10 comments

    Maybe it is time to let Darwin take over. The human population has failed to eliminate genetically inferior elements because the governments tend to protect the inferiors from themselves. To that end, we have cities like Chicago with 50% High School graduation rates. One room school houses did bette …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: safety, flatscreen-tvs, tipover, rossen-reports
  • 3
    Dec
    2012
    10:57am, EST

    'Frightening tale' about fracking draws rebuttal from industry group

    Critics say that "fracking" – pumping water and chemicals into the ground to release oil and gas –  is a risky business that can cause water contamination. But cash-strapped cities like Youngstown, Ohio, are contemplating selling mineral rights to allow energy companies to drill and frack. NBC's Phil LeBeau reports.

    An Open Channel post last week from the Food & Environment Reporting Network drew the attention of Steve Everley, a spokesman for Energy In Depth, a research and public education program of the Independent Petroleum Association of America. Here is his rebuttal to the article, which appeared in a longer form in The Nation.

    By Steve Everley
    Energy In Depth

    A recent article in The Nation magazine, in collaboration with the Food & Environment Reporting Network (FERN), made a series of declarations and assertions about the impacts of hydraulic fracturing, specifically with respect to agriculture and America’s food supplies. It was a frightening tale, but the facts that were left out were just as notable (if not more so) than what was selectively chosen to be included.

    The central thesis of the article is that shale development, including hydraulic fracturing, is contaminating the food we eat. As the author states early on, “there’s growing evidence that these two impulses, toward energy and food independence, may be at odds with each other.”


    From there, the story advances as one would imagine. Using the fatally flawed Bamberger-Oswald “study” on hydraulic fracturing as the focal point, the author weaves a carefully constructed narrative that does everything from repeating common (and debunked) activist talking points to claiming America’s cows are being poisoned to death by oil and natural gas development.

    Of course, the story would have been much different had the author included (instead of deliberately omitting) scientific assessments that weren’t tailor-made for an anti-natural gas crowd.

    How do we know they were deliberately omitted? Well, to her credit, Elizabeth Royte (the author of the piece) reached out to Energy In Depth several weeks ago about this article. She acknowledged having read EID’s work on the subject, and then asked me some pointed (but fair) questions about potential impacts on livestock and crops from hydraulic fracturing. I sent her a detailed response, including links to studies (more on that below) that demonstrate little if any negative impact on health as a result of nearby shale development. I also emphasized that concerns about public health should always be taken seriously, and the industry naturally does exactly that. But I also cautioned that simply blaming impacts on the most convenient thing (i.e. hydraulic fracturing) without scientific evidence does not solve problems, nor does it encourage the proper kind of public dialogue to address concerns.

    Unfortunately, Ms. Royte did not see fit to print any of that, choosing only to include a brief mention of the lack of scientific pedigree in the Bamberger-Oswald paper – which was promptly bracketed by ascribing fault to the natural gas industry for a supposed lack of disclosure.

    So, what else didn’t make it into the report?

    First of all, the flaws in the Bamberger-Oswald study have been publicly documented. Dr. Ian Rae, for example, a Co-Chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee for the U.N. Environment Programme, called the study “an advocacy piece” written by individuals who “cannot be regarded as experts” in the subject about which they were writing. “It certainly does not qualify as a scientific paper,” Rae added. Rae also critiqued the journal that published the study – New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health – by saying “the refereeing process evidently was not very stringent.”

    Spencer Platt / Getty Images file

    Cabot Oil and Gas workers examine a natural gas valve at a hydraulic fracturing site in South Montrose, Penn.

    I shared all of this information with Ms. Royte, but Dr. Rae’s commentary on the Bamberger-Oswald paper was omitted entirely from the story.

    Secondly, although the article purports to be part of an “investigative reporting” effort, there was clearly a lack of interest in discussing anything that deviated from the Bamberger-Oswald paper’s conclusions. Here are just a few items relating to health impacts from development that I shared with the author, who nonetheless did not see fit to print:

    • Denton County, Texas: An analysis by two public health experts found that, “even as natural gas development expanded significantly in the area over the past several years, key indicators of health improved across every major category during those times.” Denton County is situated atop the massive Barnett Shale, one of the largest natural gas fields in the United States.
    • Fort Worth, Texas: An air quality study conducted for the City of Fort Worth – the largest and most comprehensive of its kind to date – determined there were “no significant health risks” from shale development in the area. Fort Worth, located in Tarrant County, also sits atop the Barnett Shale.
    • Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, in two separate reports of air monitoring in Pennsylvania – one each for the northeastern and southwestern portions of the state – “did not identify concentrations of any compound that would likely trigger air-related health issues associated with Marcellus Shale drilling activities.”

    There are, of course, many more examples, including hard data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that undermine the suggestion that hydraulic fracturing is a grave threat to occupational or community health. Most of us also know about the AP investigation earlier this year, which found that activists’ claims about hydraulic fracturing causing cancer and other health problems had little or no basis in fact, much less scientific evidence.

    So again, why were these examples omitted from the report? It’s really anyone’s guess. The one common denominator, however, is that none of them conforms to the notion that hydraulic fracturing is somehow a “tornado on the horizon” – as Sandra Steingraber, the lead-in voice to the Bamberger-Oswald paper, once put it. In fact, a sober review of these materials – and a proper weighting of the credibility of those who released the information – might even lead people to realize that claims about impending doom are hyperbolic and, in many cases, flat out untrue.

    Read the original piece: Livestock falling ill in fracking regions

    Here’s the bottom line: Landowners, farmers, and any other individuals can and should ask questions about the impacts of natural gas development. Those who ask questions should demand answers based on facts, and communities weighing the costs and benefits should, by definition, seek input on both sides and make decisions based on a careful review of that information.

    The problem with Ms. Royte’s report, though, is that it did not seek to be a part of that good faith dialogue. By relying on anecdotes and a single, fundamentally flawed research paper – and refusing to even discuss findings that contradict the singular message that those sources conveyed – the story that was presented to readers was not only one-sided, but actually harmful to the broader public discussion about developing oil and natural gas from shale.

    Despite that, the story has been reprinted in news outlets and other media as if it carefully weighed competing viewpoints and came to a frightening conclusion. But the truly scary part is that the author, in more than 4,000 words, flat out refused to include even a few sentences about the scientific findings that fell outside what was apparently a pre-determined conclusion.

    Maybe the next investigative report will examine the reasoning behind such a glaring omission, though we won’t be holding our breath.

    Click here to read Food & Environment Reporting Network's Elizabeth Royte response.

    More from Open Channel:

  • American held in Cuba wants US to sign 'non-belligerency pact' to pave release
  • Cuba pushes swap: its spies jailed in US for  American jailed in Havana
  • Tobacco industry used trade pacts to try to snuff out anti-smoking laws
  • Jeb Bush's reputation as education reformer gets a second look
  • As fighting raged in Syria, Russia sent tons of cash to Damascus, records show
  • One email exposes millions to ID theft risk in South Carolina cyberattack
  • Jill Kelley email: Petraeus, Allen sought help hushing 'Bubba the Love Sponge'
  •  

    Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

     

     

    11 comments

    There are literally billions of dollars at stake in this industry. It affects not just gas companies, but farmers who sell land, when resources are found, water resources, environmental impacts, and every level of city to federal government getting involved with huge fines and even criminal stakes p …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: health, safety, featured, livestock, fracturing, fracking
  • 29
    Nov
    2012
    4:08pm, EST

    Livestock falling ill in fracking regions

    Jacki Schilke

    This cow on Jacki Schilke's ranch in northeast North Dakota lost most of its tail, one of many ailments that afflicted her cattle after hydrofracturing, or fracking, began in the nearby Bakken Shale.

    By Elizabeth Royte
    Food & Environment Reporting Network

    In the midst of the domestic energy boom, livestock on farms near oil- and gas-drilling operations nationwide have been quietly falling sick and dying. While scientists have yet to isolate cause and effect, many suspect chemicals used in drilling and hydrofracking (or “fracking”) operations are poisoning animals through the air, water or soil.

    Earlier this year, Michelle Bamberger, an Ithaca, N.Y., veterinarian, and Robert Oswald, a professor of molecular medicine at Cornell’s College of Veterinary Medicine, published the first and only peer-reviewed report to suggest a link between fracking and illness in food animals.

    The authors compiled 24 case studies of farmers in six shale-gas states whose livestock experienced neurological, reproductive and acute gastrointestinal problems after being exposed — either accidentally or incidentally — to fracking chemicals in the water or air. The article, published in “New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health,” describes how scores of animals died over the course of several years. Fracking industry proponents challenged the study, since the authors neither identified the farmers nor ran controlled experiments to determine how specific fracking compounds might affect livestock.


    The death toll is insignificant when measured against the nation’s livestock population (some 97 million beef cattle go to market each year), but environmental advocates believe these animals constitute an early warning.

    Exposed livestock “are making their way into the food system, and it’s very worrisome to us,” Bamberger said. “They live in areas that have tested positive for air, water and soil contamination. Some of these chemicals could appear in milk and meat products made from these animals.”

    In Louisiana, 17 cows died after an hour’s exposure to spilled fracking fluid, which is injected miles underground to crack open and release pockets of natural gas. The most likely cause of death: respiratory failure.

    In New Mexico, hair testing of sick cattle that grazed near well pads found petroleum residues in 54 of 56 animals.

    In northern central Pennsylvania, 140 cattle were exposed to fracking wastewater when an impoundment was breached. Approximately 70 cows died, and the remainder produced only 11 calves, of which three survived.

    In western Pennsylvania, an overflowing wastewater pit sent fracking chemicals into a pond and a pasture where pregnant cows grazed: Half their calves were born dead. Dairy operators in shale-gas areas of Colorado, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Texas have also reported the death of goats exposed to fracking chemicals.

    Drilling and fracking a single well requires up to 7 million gallons of water, plus an additional 400,000 gallons of additives, including lubricants, biocides, scale- and rust-inhibitors, solvents, foaming and defoaming agents, emulsifiers and de-emulsifiers, stabilizers and breakers. At almost every stage of developing and operating an oil or gas well, chemicals and compounds can be introduced into the environment.

    Cows lose weight, die
    After drilling began just over the property line of Jacki Schilke’s ranch in the northwestern corner of North Dakota in 2009, in the heart of the state’s booming Bakken Shale, cattle began limping, with swollen legs and infections. Cows quit producing milk for their calves, they lost from 60 to 80 pounds in a week and their tails mysteriously dropped off. Eventually, five animals died, according to Schilke.

    Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene -- and well testing revealed high levels of sulfates, chromium, chloride and strontium. Schilke says she moved her herd upwind and upstream from the nearest drill pad.

    Although her steers currently look healthy, she said, “I won’t sell them because I don’t know if they’re OK.”

    Nor does anyone else. Energy companies are exempt from key provisions of environmental laws, which makes it difficult for scientists and citizens to learn precisely what is in drilling and fracking fluids or airborne emissions. And without information on the interactions between these chemicals and pre-existing environmental chemicals, veterinarians can’t hope to pinpoint an animal’s cause of death.

    The risks to food safety may be even more difficult to parse, since different plants and animals take up different chemicals through different pathways.

    “There are a variety of organic compounds, metals and radioactive material (released in the fracking process) that are of human health concern when livestock meat or milk is ingested,” said Motoko Mukai, a veterinary toxicologist at Cornell’s College of Veterinary Medicine. These “compounds accumulate in the fat and are excreted into milk. Some compounds are persistent and do not get metabolized easily.”

    Jacki Schilke

    An oil-drilling rig is visible from Jacki Schilke's ranch in North Dakota.

    Veterinarians don’t know how long chemicals may remain in animals, farmers aren’t required to prove their livestock are free of contamination before middlemen purchase them and the Food Safety Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture isn’t looking for these compounds in carcasses at slaughterhouses. 

    Documenting the scope of the problem is difficult: Scientists lack funding to study the matter, and rural vets remain silent for fear of retaliation. Farmers who receive royalty checks from energy companies are reluctant to complain, and those who have settled with gas companies following a spill or other accident are forbidden to disclose information to investigators. Some food producers would rather not know what’s going on, say ranchers and veterinarians.

    “It takes a long time to build up a herd’s reputation,” said rancher Dennis Bauste of Trenton Lake, N.D. “I’m gonna sell my calves and I don’t want them to be labeled as tainted. Besides, I wouldn’t know what to test for. Until there’s a big wipeout, a major problem, we’re not gonna hear much about this.”

    Fracking proponents criticize Bamberger and Oswald’s paper as a political, not a scientific, document. “They used anonymous sources, so no one can verify what they said,” said Steve Everley, of the industry lobby group Energy In Depth. The authors didn’t provide a scientific assessment of impacts -- testing what specific chemicals might do to cows that ingest them, for example -- so treating their findings as scientific, he continues, “is laughable at best, and dangerous for public debate at worst.” Bamberger and Oswald acknowledge this lack of scientific assessment and blame it on the dearth of funding for fracking research and on the industry’s use of nondisclosure agreements.

    The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the main lobbying group for ranchers, takes no position on fracking, but some ranchers are beginning to speak out. “These are industry-supporting conservatives, not radicals,” said Amy Mall, a senior policy analyst with the environmental group, Natural Resources Defense Council. “They are the experts in their animals’ health, and they are very concerned.”

    Last March, Christopher Portier, director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, called for studies of oil and gas production’s impact on food plants and animals. None is currently planned by the federal government.

    As local food booms, consumers wary
    But consumers intensely interested in where and how their food is grown aren’t waiting for hard data to tell them their meat or milk is safe. For them, the perception of pollution is just as bad as the real thing.

    “My beef sells itself. My farm is pristine. But a restaurant doesn’t want to visit and see a drill pad on the horizon,” said Ken Jaffe, who raises grass-fed cattle in upstate New York.

    Only recently has the local foods movement, in regions across the country, reached a critical mass. But the movement’s lofty ideals could turn out to be, in shale gas areas, a double-edged sword.

    Should the moratorium on hydrofracking in New York State be lifted, the 16,200-member Park Slope Food Co-op, in Brooklyn, will no longer buy food from farms anywhere near drilling operations -- a $4 million loss for upstate producers. The livelihood of organic goat farmer Steven Cleghorn, who’s surrounded by active wells in Pennsylvania, is already in jeopardy.

    “People at the farmers market are starting to ask exactly where this food comes from,” he said.

    This report was produced by the Food & Environment Reporting Network, an independent investigative journalism non-profit focusing on food, agriculture, and environmental health. A longer version of this story appears on TheNation.com. 

    More from Open Channel:


     

  • Tobacco industry used trade pacts to try to snuff out anti-smoking laws
  • Jeb Bush's reputation as education reformer gets a second look
  • As fighting raged in Syria, Russia sent tons of cash to Damascus, records show
  • One email exposes millions to ID theft risk in South Carolina cyberattack
  • Study finds breast cancer risk for women in auto plastics factories
  • Jill Kelley email: Petraeus, Allen sought help hushing 'Bubba the Love Sponge'
  • Broadwell, Kelley both were repeat White House visitors, official says
  • New cartel drug smuggling trend: teenage couriers 
  •  

    Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

     


    403 comments

    Anything to reap the wealth from within the ground. Big Oil's days are numbered here on earth. If not, they will be sued into oblivion by those whose lives are wrought with sickness and even death. Cattle is just the beginning, next is children and elderly as they are most vunerable. Stop fracking n …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: health, safety, featured, livestock, hydraulic, fracturing, fracking
  • 20
    Aug
    2012
    2:57pm, EDT

    'Travesty of justice': State quietly dropped violations and fine in workplace death

    L.V. Hall via Center for Public Intergrity

    Tina Hall and her husband, L.V., in 2005. Tina Hall was fatally burned in a workplace accident in Franklin, Ky., two years later. Courtesy of L.V. Hall

    By Jim Morris
    Center for Public Integrity

    Around midnight on June 1, 2007, Tina Hall was finishing her shift in a place she loathed: the mixing room at the Toyo Automotive Parts factory in Franklin, Ky., where flammable chemicals were kept in open containers.

    A spark ignited vapors given off by toluene, a solvent Hall was transferring from a 55-gallon drum to a hard plastic bin. A flash fire engulfed the 39-year-old team leader, causing third-degree burns over 90 percent of her body. She died 11 days later.


    Follow Open Channel on Twitter and Facebook.


    After investigating the accident, the Kentucky Labor Cabinet’s Department of Workplace Standards cited Toyo for 16 “serious” violations and proposed a $105,500 fine in November 2007.

    “You’re disappointed because you think, that’s all they got fined?” Hall’s sister, Amy Harville, of Moulton, Ala., said in a telephone interview. “But then I thought, at least they got 16 violations. I was thinking they’d stick, as severely as she was burned.”


    The violations didn’t stick. Every one of them went away in 2008, as did the fine, after Toyo’s lawyer vowed to contest the enforcement action in court. Last month, in a move believed to be unprecedented in Kentucky, the Department of Workplace Standards reinstated all the violations because, it said, the company hadn’t made promised safety improvements.

     

     

    The case was another black eye for state-run workplace health and safety programs nationwide. In all, 26 states administer their own programs under federal supervision. Several have been criticized in recent years for capitulating to lawyered-up employers, performing subpar inspections and shutting out accident victims’ families.

    Officials in Kentucky didn’t tell Harville and Hall’s husband that the Toyo violations had been dismissed. They found out in 2010 only because Ron Hayes, a fellow Alabamian who runs a nonprofit advocacy group for families of fallen workers, had taken an interest in the case and checked in regularly with the Department of Workplace Standards.

    Hayes — whose son, Pat, died in a Florida grain elevator accident in 1993 — lodged a formal complaint against Kentucky with the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which concluded in June 2011 that the state had erred.

    “Deleting citations in their entirety sends a signal to employers that they need only contest to alleviate the burden of history,” OSHA’s regional administrator in Atlanta, Cindy Coe, wrote to Hayes.

    In a written statement, Kentucky’s Department of Workplace Standards said it dismissed the violations after determining that “the case would not have withstood legal challenge.” Instead, the department and Toyo entered into a settlement agreement, which provided for follow-up inspections. Toyo’s alleged failure to meet the terms of that agreement led to the reinstatement of the violations last month.

    The reinstatement showed that the violations never should have been dropped in the first place, Hayes said. “It’s vindication, because we said all along this was wrong,” he said.

    The president of Toyo Automotive Parts did not return calls seeking comment. In a 2008 legal filing, Toyo denied responsibility for Tina Hall’s death, calling the accident “the result of unforeseeable, isolated acts undertaken by an individual employee.”

    Problems in the states
    Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, states that choose to regulate workplace health and safety must ensure that their programs are “at least as effective” as the federal one. OSHA pays up to half the cost of such programs and is supposed to keep tabs on them.

    By some accounts, it hasn’t done a particularly good job. After press reports about a rash of construction worker deaths in Las Vegas, OSHA reviewed the Nevada program in 2009 and found a long list of flaws. Among them: State inspectors weren’t sufficiently trained to identify construction hazards and were discouraged by managers from issuing “willful” violations — which suggest an employer showed “plain indifference to the law” and can lead to stiff penalties — to avoid protracted court battles.

    OSHA looked at the programs in the 25 other states that administer their own, finding deficiencies such as uncollected penalties in North Carolina and misclassified violations in South Carolina. Kentucky, OSHA found, was taking too long to issue citations and wasn’t making complainants aware of “specific official findings.”

    In 2011, the Labor Department’s inspector general reported that OSHA hadn’t found a suitable way to measure the effectiveness of state programs. In his response to the IG, OSHA chief David Michaels wrote that the agency was developing a new monitoring system that would involve, among other things, reviews of state enforcement case files.

    Click here to sign up to receive our Top News email each day

    Still, Hayes believes that “systemic problems” persist. “Oversight from federal OSHA has been lacking for the past 42 years,” he said. “There are so many different problems from state to state.”

    Indeed, Hawaii’s program — described as “poor” in a 2010 OSHA report — has been severely hampered by budget and staffing cuts for the past three years. Things got so bad that state officials recently asked the federal government for help.

    ‘The Five Commitments’ 
    In its 2007 annual report, Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., a Japanese conglomerate that makes tires, auto parts and chemicals in plants around the world, lists what it calls “The Five Commitments.”

    “We make safety our highest priority in the provision of products and services,” reads Commitment No. 2.

    Tina Hall thought otherwise, according to her husband. At the time of the accident in June 2007, she was trying to transfer out of the Franklin plant’s adhesive department because the job required her to spend time in the mixing room, where toxic and flammable chemicals were stored.

    “She talked about how bad the fumes were in that room,” said L.V. Hall, who lives in Bremen, Ala. “She said something about the disposal of chemicals — they weren’t doing it right. I’d been wanting her to get out of that mess.”

    Tina Hall and other team leaders would go into the mixing room to fill plastic bins, known as totes, with solvents such as toluene. They’d clean gummed-up machine fixtures in the totes. Team leaders also would fill five-gallon buckets with solvents and carry them to adhesive machines on the factory floor. The solvents were used to take residue off the machines.

    Kentucky’s Department of Workplace Standards would later cite Toyo for obstructing exit routes in the mixing room, not keeping flammable liquids in covered containers when they weren’t being used, failing to control vapors and having inadequate fire-protection equipment.

    On the night of the accident, Tina Hall was cleaning fixtures by herself when a spark, likely caused by static electricity, ignited toluene vapors and set off an explosion in a 55-gallon drum of methyl isobutyl ketone, another solvent.

    Then a General Motors assembly line worker, L.V. Hall was awakened at home in Auburn, Ky., by a call from a Toyo team leader around midnight. His wife, on fire, had managed to get outside and roll on the ground. “How she got outside I don’t know,” Hall said. “It was like an obstacle course to find the exit door.”

    Tina Hall was taken to a local hospital, then to Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, about 45 minutes away. L.V. had a brief talk with her before the doctors put her into a coma to shield her from the pain. “She said, ‘I did everything the way I was supposed to do it,’” Hall said. His wife drifted off and never regained consciousness. She died on June 12, 2007.

    'Travesty of justice'
    Not long afterward Tina Hall’s younger sister, Amy Harville, was directed to Ron Hayes by an acquaintance. Burly, white-bearded and tenacious, Hayes lives in Fairhope, Ala., and runs the FIGHT Project, which helps families navigate the bureaucracy of workplace fatality investigations. Hayes counseled Harville and L.V. Hall as the state’s inquiry into the Toyo accident progressed.

    When the Department of Workplace Standards issued 16 serious violations against the company in November 2007, “I was OK with it,” L.V. Hall said. “I didn’t realize that once that’s done, these attorneys can get in there and just do away with it.”

    Documents obtained by the Center for Public Integrity under the Freedom of Information Act show how Toyo’s lawyer, Mark Dreux of Arent Fox in Washington, D.C., fought the state of Kentucky from the beginning. Dreux declined to comment on the case.

    In March 2008, the state offered to reduce the penalty from $105,500 to $74,000. Dreux refused. In June 2008, the state proposed a further reduction, to $15,000, for three violations. Dreux said no. In November 2008, Dreux got what he wanted: No violations and no fine.

    It was Hayes who first learned, in July 2010, that all the violations had been deleted. He alerted Harville.

    “I was devastated,” she said. “It takes you back all over again, like Tina was killed for the second time.”

    She called L.V. Hall, who reacted similarly. “I was just shaking I was so upset,” he said. He called the Department of Workplace Standards and finally reached “the lady attorney who was over the case. I basically told her, ‘I cannot believe y’all dropped every one of those citations.’ She said, ‘Well, Mr. Hall, I am an attorney and there was not enough evidence.’”

    Hayes knew what to do. He filed a CASPA — Complaint About State Program Administration — with OSHA’s Atlanta regional office, calling Kentucky’s dismissal of the citations a “travesty of justice.”

    After an investigation, Regional Administrator Cindy Coe, in essence, agreed, writing in June of last year that “the violations were well documented and legally sufficient and there was no definitive evidence in the file that indicated that they could not be supported.” Deleting all the citations, Coe wrote, erases an employer’s safety history and deprives regulators of critical information should subsequent enforcement actions commence.

    “It also signals to compliance staff that their efforts are for no good end, if the point is to drop everything at the threat of going to court,” the administrator wrote. “It further signals to employees in the workplace that there is no entity on their side.”

    In his response to Coe, the commissioner of the Kentucky Labor Cabinet, Michael Dixon, wrote that the state “does not retreat from litigation” but didn’t believe it could defend the case before the Kentucky Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, an appeal body.

    In May, a state inspector returned to the Toyo plant in Franklin to see if the company had done all the things it said it would do after Tina Hall’s death — making sure supervisors were trained in the correct way to clean fixtures, for example. It hadn’t.

    In a July 5 letter, Susan Draper, then director of the Kentucky Labor Cabinet’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health Compliance, notified Ronald Wyans, president of Toyo Automotive Parts (USA), that the 16 original citations had been reinstated, as had the proposed $105,500 penalty. The Tina Hall case had come full circle.

    Sometime in the next few weeks, Amy Harville, L.V. Hall and Hall’s lawyers expect to meet with Dixon and Toyo counsel. They expect to learn whether Toyo intends to accept its punishment or continue fighting.

    “When somebody gets killed in one of these workplaces, it shouldn’t be this way,” L.V. Hall said. “I had Ron Hayes on my side and he knew what to do. Most people don’t have Ron. These citations never would have been brought back without him.”

    The Center for Public Integrity is a nonprofit, independent investigative news outlet.

    Submit ideas Share your story ideas with Open Channel

    Send documents Send us a document

    Facebook Follow Open Channel on Facebook

    Twitter Keep up with Open Channel on Twitter

    E-mail alerts Sign up for e-mail alerts

    378 comments

    Accidents don't just happen, she was there because people work in this world and people hire people to work for them. The people that hire people need to insure the safety of the work as well as the people doing the work need to be aware of the dangers and make the decision whether or not to put the …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: safety, workplace, featured, toyo, osha
  • 21
    May
    2012
    6:14am, EDT

    More Americans died in workplace in '09 than during entire Iraq war

    On Sept. 3, 2009, contract laborer Nick Revetta was killed in an explosion at U.S. Steel's Clairton Plant near Pittsburgh. Revetta's death and the events that followed reveal the limitations of a federal law meant to protect American workers.

    By msnbc.com

    When Nicholas Adrian Revetta of suburban Pittsburgh died in an explosion at a U.S. Steel plant on Sept. 3, 2009, his death did not make national headlines. No hearings were held into the accident that killed him. No one was fired or sent to jail.           

    The 32-year-old contract laborer, who left behind a wife and two young children, was one of the 4,551 people killed on the job in America in 2009 -- a number that eclipsed the total number of U.S. fatalities in the nine-year Iraq war. Combined with the estimated 50,000 people who die annually of work-related diseases, it's as if a fully loaded Boeing 737-700 crashed every day.


    The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 entitles American workers to "safe and healthful" conditions in their workplaces. But an examination of Revetta's death by the Center for Public Integrity illustrates how safety can yield to speed, how even fatal accidents can have few consequences for employers -- who are typically fined just $7,900 per fatality -- and how federal investigations can be cut short by what some call a de facto quota system.  

     

    Click here to read the rest of the story.

     

    Submit ideas Share your story ideas with Open Channel

    Send documents Send us a document

    Facebook Follow Open Channel on Facebook

    Twitter Keep up with Open Channel on Twitter

    E-mail alerts Sign up for e-mail alerts

    190 comments

    Should be named OSHlT,not OSHA!

    Show more
    Explore related topics: deaths, job, safety, workplace, featured, osha, center-for-public-integrity
  • 16
    May
    2012
    3:59pm, EDT

    Why are stores continuing to sell soft, fluffy -- and hazardous -- crib products?

    A new CDC report says an increasing number of babies are suffocating while they are sleeping, due to cribs cluttered with stuffed animals and bumpers. Why are these dangerous bumpers still on the market? NBC's Jeff Rossen investigates whether baby product companies are putting profits before safety.

    Today's National Investigative Correspondent Jeff Rossen examines why, despite numerous safety warnings, manufacturers continue to make and stores continue to sell soft and fluffy crib products that experts warn can cause infant deaths.

    Also, click here to read the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations for safe baby sleep and the prevention of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome).

    Comment

    Show more
    Explore related topics: safety, products, hazardous, hazard, infants, pediatrics, bumpers, baby-cribs
  • 14
    Feb
    2012
    3:06am, EST

    Was study of digital billboard safety botched?

    A study of electronic billboards and traffic safety commissionedtThe Federal Highway Administration was supposed to have been completed in 2009, but it remains cloaked in mystery.

    By Myron Levin
    FairWarning

    Billboard companies are moving aggressively to plant digital signs along U.S. highways and city streets. But debate persists on whether the eye-grabbing displays, which typically change messages every 6 to 8 seconds, pose a risk to traffic safety.

    Combatants in the billboard wars -- including local and state officials under industry pressure to permit more of the lucrative signs -- are eager for a study by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). They have hoped that the much-anticipated study, launched in 2007, would help clarify some key safety questions.

    Yet the politically sensitive research, which was supposed to have been wrapped up in 2009, remains cloaked in mystery. All the FHWA has said, time after time, is that the study is under review.

    It turns out that officials may be afraid to make an embarrassing admission.

    According to records obtained by FairWarning under the Freedom of Information Act, expert reviewers have told the FHWA that the study appears to have been botched. The key findings vary so wildly from previous research that, as one reviewer put it, they “are not plausible.”


    The agency has refused to answer questions. “We have no one available to be interviewed,” said spokesman Doug Hecox, adding that “internal discussions about the draft of the study are ongoing.” He would not say if FHWA plans to toss the research or try to salvage it.

    The hundreds of pages of agency emails and other records reviewed by FairWarning, however, speak loudly about the political and financial stakes, as well as industry efforts to influence public opinion.

    The unreleased draft, which drew withering critiques from two experts, gave the billboard industry what it wanted, the documents show. Those results indicated that drivers’ glances at billboards were exceedingly brief, suggesting that the displays aren’t a threat to traffic safety. 

    Yet the billboard industry, led by the Outdoor Advertising Association of America, was deeply worried. The trade group campaigned to remove a study consultant that the industry accused of having an anti-billboard bias and brought out its own studies to frame public debate while the FHWA was still studying the issue.

    Digital signs proliferate
    Today, of more than 400,000 billboards in the U.S., estimates of digital displays range from slightly more than 2,000 to as many as 3,200. The industry has been adding hundreds of the more-profitable signs each year.

    The FHWA study followed a controversial memo by the agency in September 2007 that appeared to green light the digital expansion. The memo stated that electronic displays were not prohibited under longstanding federal-state agreements that ban “intermittent’’ or ‘’flashing’’ signs. 

    Anti-billboard groups, including Scenic America, denounced the memo as farcical, saying billboards that alternate content every few seconds are the exact definition of “intermittent’’ signs. Responding to attacks, the FHWA said that it was only clarifying existing policy. 

    Stung by backlash from the memo, the FHWA launched its study. It relied on sophisticated instruments to monitor how long drivers on fixed routes in Reading, Pa., and Richmond, Va., glanced at digital billboards.

    “Lots of interest from all sides,” said an email from senior agency official, referring to the research. “There is huge money involved here, so the interests are getting pretty strident.” 

    A consulting firm, Science Applications International Corp., was hired to run the study. It brought on Jerry Wachtel, a Berkeley-based traffic safety expert, as an adviser. Science Applications declined comment.  

    The industry at the time was smarting from a report by Wachtel for Maryland transportation officials. They had asked him to review two industry-sponsored studies that the industry said confirmed the safety of digital billboards. Wachtel’s report said both studies were biased and misleading. 

    Scenic America

    A Clear Channel digital billboard advertises itself through electrical wires in Sarasota, Fla.

    In a seemingly orchestrated campaign, several industry groups and members of Congress fired off letters attacking Wachtel and seeking his removal from the FHWA study. In its letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the outdoor advertising association blasted what it called Wachtel’s “high-profile activism.” 

    Five House members from Pennsylvania — Democrats Jason Altmire, Christopher Carney and Tim Holden, and Republicans Charles W. Dent and Todd Russell Platts — signed a letter to FHWA Administrator Victor Mendez complaining of biased remarks by Wachtel at a hearing on billboards in their state. His involvement, they wrote, “may undermine the credibility of ongoing federal research.”

    Billboard industry's political donations
    All five lawmakers have received campaign support from billboard executives or political action committees since 2006, according to research by the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics. The donations totaled at least $26,484. 

    Altmire spokesman Richard Carbo said in an email that the congressmen “were concerned that the reports from the Federal Highway Administration were not unbiased.  That was the only purpose of the letter.”

    In fact, Wachtel’s role was limited and his involvement basically had ended by the time of the protests.  However, FHWA officials wanted to avoid any appearance of caving in. “I think we have to be very careful in dealing with this issue,” one official said in an email.  “We do not want industry dictating whom we may or may not employ on our projects.” 

    Responding to the outdoor advertising association, FHWA Associate Administrator Gloria Shepherd wrote: “We are well aware of the sensitive nature of this research. … I can assure you that we will be monitoring’’ the work “to be sure it is accomplished in an objective manner.” 

    Wachtel, who has worked for billboard companies in the past, told FairWarning that “in their eyes, I have been both the world’s smartest guy and the world’s worst individual. I’m the smartest guy when I tell them what they want to hear.” 

    In response to questions from FairWarning, the association said in an email that “OAAA and the outdoor industry support fair research. In fact, we’ve researched traffic safety for years. …The results have not indicated a correlation between digital billboards and traffic accidents.” 

    Records show that FHWA officials rebuffed a Freedom of Information request from an industry lawyer to disclose the research locations, saying they would be kept secret “until the tests are completed to protect the integrity of the results.” 

    But the industry found out, anyway. It launched its own studies in Reading and Richmond and blared the results. “Digital Billboards Not Linked to Accidents,” a press release said. 

    Records show the FHWA study was submitted in September 2010, and circulated for internal review in the fall. “The final report is scheduled to be released to the public in December 2010,” an agency memo said. 

    However, the review continued into 2011, when the two outside experts criticized it. Identified only as “REVIEWER 1” and “REVIEWER 2,” they concluded that the data appeared to be wrong. 

    Distracted driving research has sought to find the amount of time when drivers looking away from the road raises the risk of a crash. In the scientific literature, glance times associated with a higher crash risk have been variously estimated at 2 seconds, 1.6 seconds or three-quarters of a second. 

    Almost impossible
    In the FHWA study, recorded glances were so brief that none came close to 2 seconds or even 1.6 seconds. Only about 1 percent were above three-quarters of a second.

    In fact, the average was slightly below one-tenth of a second -- a number both expert reviewers considered almost impossible.

    “The reported glances to billboards here are on the order of 10-times shorter than values reported elsewhere,” one reviewer wrote. “The pattern of results certainly raises questions over the quality and legitimacy of the underlying data.’’

    The other said, “The data reported as average glance durations are not plausible.”

    Two other experts contacted by FairWarning confirmed that the data was highly suspect.

    Alison Smiley, president of Human Factors North, Inc., in Toronto, said the glance times were “extremely short’’ and substantially at odds with her own studies.

    Paul A. Green, a research professor at the University of Michigan Transportation Institute, said glances so brief would mean the drivers “never really looked’’ at the billboards.

    “It’s a flaw in the data,” Green said. “You wonder, if they made this mistake did they make other mistakes?” 

    FairWarning is a nonprofit, online investigative news organization focused on public health and safety issues.

    Submit ideas Share your story ideas with Open Channel

    Send documents Send us a document

    Facebook Follow Open Channel on Facebook

    Twitter Follow Open Channel on Twitter

    E-mail alerts Sign up for e-mail alerts

    125 comments

    Personally, I despise digital signs of the neon kind that are on the 405FWY in LA and in Vegas. They are blinding at night especially and distracting and a traffic hazard. In Vegas, it behooves you to were sunglasses driving at night; those billboards are so blinding.

    Show more
    Explore related topics: digital, study, safety, driver, electronic, billboards, featured, regulations, distraction

Browse

  • featured,
  • documents,
  • terrorism,
  • al-qaida,
  • election-2012,
  • investigative-reporting,
  • iran,
  • crime,
  • reading,
  • military,
  • health,
  • investigation,
  • environment,
  • obama,
  • fbi,
  • campaign-finance,
  • pakistan,
  • u-s,
  • huguette-clark,
  • campaign,
  • updated,
  • cia,
  • guns,
  • news21,
  • voting-fraud,
  • voter-id,
  • who-can-vote,
  • nbc,
  • isikoff,
  • nuclear,
  • penn-state,
  • windrem,
  • security,
  • center-for-public-integrity,
  • osama-bin-laden,
  • politics,
  • romney,
  • wikileaks,
  • shooting,
  • safety,
  • yemen,
  • pentagon
Also
Advertise | AdChoices

Bill Dedman

Investigative reporter Bill Dedman of NBC News is always looking for good investigative story ideas and documents. Bill received the 1989 Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting, and has written full time for NBCNews.com since 2006.

Bill Dedman Blogroll

  • Bill's investigative reporting feed on Twitter
  • ABC News The Blotter
  • Center for Investigative Reporting
  • Center for Public Integrity
  • Center for Public Integrity's Paper Trail blog
  • Huffington Post Investigative Fund
  • Investigative Reporters and Editors' Extra! Extra!
  • McClatchey blog Nukes & Spooks
  • New York Times' City Room Records blog
  • New York Times' Open data blog
  • ProPublica
  • ProPublica blog
  • Yahoo! News The Upshot
  • TPM Muckraker
  • Washington Post Investigations
  • WhoWhatWhy forensic journalism
  • New England Center for Investigative Center at Bos
  • Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism
  • Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting
  • Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism, B
  • MinnPost.com
  • The Washington Independent
  • AU Investivative Reporting Workshop
  • Become a fan on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
Have an idea?
Send your ideas and documents for investigative stories.

Michael Isikoff

Michael Isikoff joined NBC News in July 2010 as national investigative correspondent. He had been at Newsweek since 1994 as an investigative correspondent. He has written extensively on the U.S. government's war on terrorism, the Abu Ghraib scandal, campaign-finance and congressional ethics abuses, presidential politics and other national issues.

Amna Nawaz

Amna Nawaz is Bureau Chief/Correspondent for NBC News' Pakistan bureau. She reports for all NBC News platforms from across the country and the region. Previously, she reported for the network's investigative unit.

Mike Brunker, Investigations Editor, NBC News

Mike Brunker is the investigations editor at NBCNews.com. He's worked for the site (formerly msnbc.com) as a reporter and editor since August 1996. Before that, he was an editor at the San Francisco Examiner and Hayward Daily Review in California.

Mike Brunker, Investigations Editor, NBC News Blogroll

  • White Collar Crime Prof blog
  • The Volokh Conspiracy: Legal news now
  • Frederick Lane Blog -- legal news
  • Social Networking Law Blog
  • Sports Law Blog
  • Business of Horse Racing Blog
  • The Long War Journal
  • The Red Tape Chronicles -- consumer/tech news

Azriel James Relph

Azriel James Relph is a researcher for NBC News Investigations. He is a graduate of the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, and was a reporter for several years at the Hunts Point Express -- a South Bronx newspaper serving the poorest Congressional District in the United Sates. He has written for Newsweek, The Daily Beast, and MSNBC.com.

Robert Windrem

Robert Windrem is investigative producer for special projects at NBC Nightly News. He is also a Fellow at the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School. He has worked at NBC News for more than three decades, focusing on issues of international security, strategic policy, intelligence and terrorism.

M. Alex Johnson

M. Alex Johnson is a reporter for NBC News specializing in national affairs, technology and data analysis. He joined NBC News in 1999 from The Washington Post.

M. Alex Johnson Blogroll

  • Alex Johnson — Journalist at Large
  • Ars Technica
  • Krebs on Security
  • GetStats
  • Technolog
  • Sophos Security Trends
  • Muckety
  • Pew Internet Research
  • Investigative Reporters and Editors
  • Fund for Investigative Journalism
  • Data Journalism Blog
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Follow on Facebook
Follow Alex
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn

Archives

  • 2013
    • May (31)
    • April (34)
    • March (42)
    • February (21)
    • January (27)
  • 2012
    • December (33)
    • November (30)
    • October (39)
    • September (34)
    • August (46)
    • July (36)
    • June (42)
    • May (52)
    • April (28)
    • March (24)
    • February (38)
    • January (42)
  • 2011
    • December (27)
    • November (23)
    • October (15)
    • September (9)
    • August (6)
    • July (11)
    • June (12)
    • May (12)
    • April (5)
    • March (11)
    • February (11)
    • January (21)
  • 2010
    • December (11)
    • November (13)

Most Commented

  • Cruel or necessary? The true cost of wild horse roundups (773)
  • Dzhokhar Tsarnaev scribbled note inside boat where he was hiding, sources say (718)
  • AP calls government's record seizure a 'massive and unprecedented intrusion' (727)
  • IRS mishandling of Tea Party reviews still unresolved, audit charges (909)
  • As applications swell, IRS nonprofit division overloaded, understaffed (379)
  • Bomb plot briefing may undercut DOJ's case for AP records seizure (234)
  • IRS watchdog: Senior official knew in 2011 that Tea Party groups were targeted (328)

Other blogs

  • The Body Odd
  • Cosmic Log
  • Red Tape Chronicles
  • PhotoBlog
  • US News

NBCNews.com top stories

3147,10
© 2013 NBCNews.com
  • US news on NBCNews.com
  • About us
  • Contact
  • Help
  • Site map
  • Careers
  • Closed captioning
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Advertise