Opinion ID: 71020
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Finding of Significant Risk

Text: 17 Second, petitioners allege that OSHA has not demonstrated, by substantial evidence, a significant risk of material harm which is addressed by the June 30, 1994 revision of the apparel provision. Specifically, petitioners allege that OSHA's determination of the existence of a significant risk with regard to natural fabrics is contrary to the record evidence. 18 Before OSHA can issue a permanent standard pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 655(b) (1988) it must find, as a threshold matter, that a significant occupational health or safety risk exists. AFL-CIO v. OSHA, 965 F.2d at 972-73. This finding must be made in order to comply with the requirement that all OSHA standards must be reasonably necessary or appropriate to provide safe or healthful employment and places of employment. 29 U.S.C. § 652(8). 19 OSHA's finding of a safety hazard with respect to synthetics, and natural fabrics under certain conditions, is based on the comments and submissions in the rulemaking record made by various electric utility industry representatives. Based on this information, OSHA found that a significant risk of harm exists for those workers exposed to electric arcs while wearing clothing made of easily ignited fabrics which can increase the extent of injury caused. What must be ascertained is whether OSHA's determination of the existence of a significant risk of harm is based on substantial evidence. Texas Independent Ginners Ass'n. v. Marshall, 630 F.2d 398, 406 (5th Cir.1980). 5 20 Based on the record as a whole, it is our belief that OSHA has presented substantial evidence of a significant risk, thus justifying the inclusion of the clarification within the apparel provision. OSHA primarily relied on the Duke Power Videotape, which reported on previous tests performed on a variety of treated and untreated fabrics, and which showed a demonstration highlighting the alarming effects of exposure to electrical arcs while wearing synthetics. 6 We find that the video was powerful and substantial evidence that synthetics, as well as lightweight natural fabrics, do not adequately protect workers from the burning and possible melting and sticking which can be caused by exposure to electrical arcs. Comments from some other industry representatives also suggest that because synthetics are dangerous, natural fabrics should be worn. All of this is consistent with OSHA's determination that while all untreated synthetics should be prohibited, natural fabrics are acceptable so long as they fall into one of two categories: 1) lightweight natural fabrics that have been treated and are flame resistant, and 2) heavy weight natural fabrics. 21 We find that the record contains substantial evidence supporting OSHA's determination that wearing synthetics and untreated lightweight natural fabrics poses a significant risk of harm to electric utility workers exposed to electric arcs. 22