Birth of an OSHA policy

In 2001, amidst the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, John Henshaw, then head of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), unknowingly initiated a legacy that would shape the agency's approach to emergency response. Henshaw's pivotal role in overseeing the safety of disaster rescue workers exposed to hazardous toxins at Ground Zero led to an agreement with the companies involved in the cleanup. OSHA would not penalize these companies for workplace safety violations but would instead offer guidance on prompt corrective actions. In return, the companies would swiftly address these infractions.

This groundbreaking agreement, born out of the 9/11 response, laid the foundation for OSHA's emergency-response policy. It set the standard for monitoring the health and safety of workers engaged in the challenging task of cleaning up after disasters, including those intensified by climate change, such as hurricanes, floods, and wildfires. Henshaw believed that suspending OSHA's enforcement mandate would streamline access to worksites and foster transparency in the oversight process. Instead of lengthy enforcement negotiations, immediate remedies could be implemented to safeguard workers. Young Wheeler, OSHA's emergency management director, shared this vision.

In the wake of 9/11, OSHA deployed 70 inspectors around the clock for approximately ten months under this compliance assistance mode. Their mission was to monitor the companies' operations and recommend corrections in line with OSHA's safety provisions for protective gear and toxic substance monitoring. This voluntary compliance approach became institutionalized in OSHA's emergency management plan for future disaster responses, authored by Henshaw in 2003.

Two years later, Hurricane Katrina struck Louisiana, marking the first test of OSHA's policy in the context of a climate-driven catastrophe. However, the circumstances in the aftermath of a natural disaster differed significantly from those following a terrorist attack. Henshaw admitted that when crafting the policy, he had focused more on human-caused calamities than the devastation caused by hurricanes, floods, and wildfires.

An investigative report by Columbia Journalism Investigations and The Center for Public Integrity uncovered a troubling aspect of this policy: disaster-restoration workers often find themselves exposed to known carcinogens and toxic substances while clearing debris from climate-fueled disasters, all too often without adequate protection or awareness. OSHA's policy, meant to protect these workers, inadvertently leaves them vulnerable to hidden health hazards while allowing companies to bypass regulations without the fear of penalties.

Ground Zero, where the policy originated, was a relatively contained area, roughly the size of 12 football fields. In contrast, Hurricane Katrina's destruction spanned four states, with OSHA's regional office in Louisiana focused on Baton Rouge and New Orleans, where over 134,000 structures had been destroyed. The workload was staggering, with fewer than 50 inspectors responsible for monitoring thousands of companies across both cities. Their 12-hour shifts paled in comparison to the round-the-clock oversight provided at Ground Zero.

Despite the differences in scale, OSHA has since applied this policy during numerous climate disasters over the past two decades, including at least eight hurricanes, according to agency records. However, due to the lack of a mandatory system for tracking compliance assistance activities, it is challenging to determine when and for how long this policy has been in effect. Furthermore, the agency does not publicly identify violators among the companies involved in these events. Records reveal that OSHA's interventions often amount to inspectors distributing pamphlets on proper mold abatement or suggesting the use of masks, hard hats, or harnesses.

Aubrey Miller, who heads the National Institutes of Health's disaster response program, pointed out that OSHA's emergency response, much like its federal counterparts, is not adequately designed to address the unique challenges posed by climate change-induced disasters. "These disasters aren't going away; they're just getting worse," he warned, emphasizing that the current approach results in billions spent on cleanup while continually playing catch-up.

OSHA officials defend their current policy, asserting that the regular enforcement process would be too slow to protect workers in situations requiring swift demolition and cleanup. An internal memo from 2014, intended to guide regional administrators on emergency response, underscores that traditional enforcement could cast the agency in an "unfavorable" light.

In the face of escalating climate-related disasters, the evolution of OSHA's emergency response policy remains a subject of scrutiny and debate, with the safety and well-being of disaster-restoration workers hanging in the balance. The legacy initiated by John Henshaw in the wake of 9/11 continues to shape how OSHA approaches its mission of safeguarding workers during times of crisis.

https://publicintegrity.org/environment/toxic-labor/birth-of-an-osha-policy/