osha instruction cpl 2-2.38c oct 22 1990 office of health ... · osha instruction cpl 2-2.38c oct...

U.S. Department of Labor Assistant Secretary forOccupational Safety and HealthWashington, D.C. 20210

OSHA Instruction CPL 2-2.38C

OCT 22 1990Office of Health Compliance Assistance

Subject: Inspection Procedures for the Hazard CommunicationStandard, 29 CFR 1910.1200, 1915.99, 1917.28,1918.90, 1926.59, and 1928.21

A. Purpose. This instruction establishes policies and providesclarifications to ensure uniform enforcement of the HazardCommunication Standard (HCS).

B. Scope. This instruction applies OSHA-wide.

C. References.

1. OSHA Instruction CPL 2.45B, June 15, 1989, the RevisedField Operations Manual (FOM).

2. OSHA Instruction STP 2-1.117, August 31, 1984.

3. Voluntary Training Guidelines, Vol. 49, FR 30290, July27, 1984.

4. 29 CFR 1910.20, Access to Employee Exposure and MedicalRecords.

5. 29 CFR 1910.1047, Ethylene Oxide.

6. 29 CFR 1910.1000, Air Contaminants, Vol. 54, FR 2332,January 19, 1989.

7. The HCS was recodified and referenced as 29 CFR 1910.1200for General Industry, 1915.99 for Shipyard Employment,1917.28 for Marine Terminals, 1918.90 for Longshoring,1926.59 for Construction and 1928.21 for Agriculture. For convenience this instruction will reference onlyapplicable paragraphs. The appropriate sections of theCFR shall be referenced for citation purposes wheninspections are performed in those respective industries.

D. Cancellation. OSHA Instruction CPL 2-2.38B, August 15, 1988,is canceled.

E. Action. OSHA Regional Administrators and Area Directorsshall use the guidelines in this instruction to ensureuniform enforcement of the HCS. The Directorate ofCompliance Programs will provide support as necessary to

OSHA Instruction CPL 2-2.38COCT 22 1990Office of Health Compliance Assistance

2

assist the Regional Administrators and Area Directors inenforcing the HCS.

F. Federal Program Change. This instruction describes a FederalProgram change which affects State programs. Each RegionalAdministrator shall:

1. Ensure that this change is forwarded to each Statedesignee.

2. Explain the technical content of the change to the Statedesignee as requested.

3. Advise the State designees that as a result of furthercourt actions, all provisions of the Federal HCS are nowin effect in all segments of industry. The compliancedate for programmed inspections in the constructionindustry and the three previously disapproved provisionswas extended to March 17, 1989. States not alreadyenforcing in all industries were expected to have done soby that date.

4. Ensure that State designees are asked to acknowledgereceipt of this Federal program change in writing to theRegional Administrator as soon as the State’s intentionis known, but not later than 70 calendar days after thedate of issuance (10 days for mailing and 60 days forresponse). This acknowledgment must include the State’sintention to follow OSHA’s policies and proceduresdescribed in this instruction, or a description of theState’s alternative policy and/or procedure which is “atleast as effective” as the Federal policy and/orprocedure or of the reasons why the change should notapply to that State.

5. Ensure that the State designees submit a plan supplement,in accordance with OSHA Instruction STP 2.22A, Ch-3, asappropriate, following the established schedule that isagreed upon by the State and Regional Administrator tosubmit non-Field Operations Manual/Technical ManualFederal Program Changes.

a. If a State intends to follow the revised inspectionprocedures described in this instruction, the Statemust submit either a revised version of thisinstruction, adapted as appropriate to reference


3

State law, regulations and administrative structure,or a cover sheet describing how references in thisinstruction correspond to the State’s structure. The State’s acknowledgment letter may fulfill theplan supplement requirement if the appropriatedocumentation is provided.

b. If the State adopts an alternative to Federalenforcement inspection procedures, the State’s plansupplement must identify and provide a rationale forall substantial differences from Federal proceduresin order for OSHA to judge whether a different Stateprocedure is as effective as a comparable procedure. An alternative enforcement policy would presumablybe necessary in a State with a right-to-know law ora different hazard communication standard.

c. Any State which has a right-to-know law shall alsodocument in the plan supplement how enforcement ofthe right-to-know law substitutes for, relates to orinterfaces with the hazard communication standard,and how the State maintains separation of anypublic/community right-to-know enforcementactivities from its approved State plan workplaceoperations.

6. After Regional review of the State plan supplement andresolution of any comments thereon, forward the Statesubmission to the National Office in accordance withestablished procedures. The Regional Administrator shallprovide a judgment on the relative effectiveness of eachsubstantial difference in the State plan change and anoverall assessment thereon with a recommendation forapproval or disapproval by the Assistant Secretary.

7. Review policies, instructions and guidelines issued bythe State to determine that this change has beencommunicated to State personnel.

G. Special Identifiers. The sections of this instruction whichare marked with an asterisk (*) have particular relevance toconstruction employers.

H. Background. A final Hazard Communication Standard *(HCS), 29 CFR 1910.1200, covering the manufacturing sector,Standard Industrial Classification Codes (SIC) 20-39, was


4

published in the Federal Register on November 25, 1983 (48 FR53280). As a result of a court challenge, OSHA was orderedby the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to expandthe scope of the standard without further rulemaking.

1. On August 24, 1987, a final rule covering all employerswas published in the Federal Register. Due to subsequentcourt and administrative actions, OSHA was prevented fromenforcing the rule in the construction industry and fromenforcing in all industries three requirements dealingwith providing and maintaining material safety datasheets (MSDSs) on multi-employer worksites, coverage ofconsumer products, and the coverage of drugs in thenonmanufacturing sector.

2. As a result of the February 21, 1990, Supreme Courtdecision (see Dole, Secretary of Labor, et, al., v.United Steelworkers of America et. al., No. 88-1434), allprovisions of the rule are now in effect for allindustrial segments, including the three previouslystayed provisions mentioned above. OSHA extended thecompliance date until March 17, 1989, for programmedinspections in the construction industry.

I. Organization of this Instruction. Compliance guidelines areaddressed within the main part of this instruction. Clarifications, interpretations, review aids and otherinformation are provided in Appendices A through D. Thisformat will permit easier updating and additions, asenforcement experience provides more information regardingthese areas.

1. Appendix A of this instruction provides clarifications ofprovisions of the standard where significantinterpretations have been necessary to ensure uniformenforcement and understanding.

2. Appendix B provides a sample letter for inquiriesregarding missing or deficient MSDS and labels.

3. Appendix C provides general guidelines for evaluation ofhazards.

4. Appendix D provides a guide for reviewing MSDS.


5

J. Inspection Resources. Compliance safety and health officers(CSHOs) shall evaluate employer compliance with the HCSduring the course of all inspections. (See the FOM, ChapterIII, D.7.a.2.)

1. Both safety and health CSHOs shall evaluate employercompliance with the written program requirements, use oflabels, availability of MSDS and appropriate training.

2. CSHOs of one discipline shall consult with those of theother when specific expertise is necessary to evaluateelements of the employer’s program.

K. Inspection Guidelines. The following guidelines apply to allinspections conducted to determine compliance with the HCS:

1. Inspection Guidance. The HCS incorporates bothspecification and performance requirements which areresult-oriented, thereby providing goals for achievementand allowing employers the flexibility to develop aprogram suitable for their particular facility. Inevaluating compliance with the rule, CSHOs should alwaysconsider whether the intent of the provisions have beenmet. CSHOs must exercise a high level of professionaljudgment during compliance inspections. The standarditself, and the preamble accompanying it, are to beconsulted for further guidance.

2. Special Documentation. In addition to those itemsrequired by the FOM, Chapter IV, C. 8. as applicable,when citations are recommended, the CSHO shall documentthe following on the OSHA-1B or, as appropriate,elsewhere in the case file:

a. Name of the chemical(s).

b. Name of the person preparing the hazarddetermination, written program, label, MSDS, etc.and for whom they work.

c. CSHOs shall ensure that the number of employees whomay be exposed (including potential exposure) to thechemical in the establishment is documented

d. If a chemical manufacturer, importer, or distributoris inspected, indicate the name of a downstream


6

employer who receives the chemical, includingcompany name, address, and potential or actualdownstream employee exposure.

e. Health and physical hazards.

f. If practical, include a photocopy or a photograph ofinaccurate and/or any incomplete label(s)/MSDS inthe case file. Otherwise document the specificdeficiency in the case file. If the volume ofinaccurate/incomplete MSDS cannot reasonably beincluded in the file, then a representative numbershould be documented, indexing those referenced inthe citation.

3. Scope and Application-Paragraph (b). The HCS requireslabels and MSDS to be transmitted from chemicalmanufacturers and importers to distributors to employersto employees. No barrier to this information flow ispermitted.

a. This paragraph outlines exemptions to full coverageof the standard. A complete exemption from allrequirements of the HCS applies for only those itemslisted under (b)(6) and should not be confused withthe labeling exemptions at (b)(5) which only applywhen chemicals are subject to the labelingrequirements of certain Federal agencies.

b. Laboratories and sealed containers are dealt with ina limited fashion as per paragraphs (b)(3) and(b)(4).

c. Inspection Guidelines. As explained in *H.2. of this instruction, the HCS has been fullyenforceable in all SIC’s since March 17, 1989.

(1) The Scope and Application paragraph (b) of theHCS requires “all employers to provideinformation to their employees about thehazardous chemicals to which they are exposed,by means of a hazard communication program,labels and other forms of warning, materialsafety data sheets and information andtraining.” (Emphasis added.)


7

(2) The expansion of the standard to all industriesvia the August 24, 1987, final rule obligatesall employers to comply with the provisions ofthe HCS. Employers must provide theiremployees with information on hazardoussubstances which are known to be present at theworksite.

(3) The scope paragraph clearly states that the HCSapplies to employers if they know hazardouschemicals are present in a manner thatemployees may be exposed, regardless of whetherthe employer has created the chemical exposure. The multi-employer worksite provisions ofparagraph (e)(2) ensure that employers are ableto obtain the information they need to be ableto meet these obligations.

(4) In some cases, a hazardous chemical may bepresent for a long period of time without anemployee exposure until repair or demolitionactivities are performed. By way of example,employers involved in work operations wherejackhammers are being used to break up asidewalk know that they are exposing theiremployees to a hazardous chemical (silica),even though they did not “bring” the hazard tothe site. Even though other provisions of thestandard may not be enforceable (MSDS andlabels), the employer should still develop ahazard communication program to inform theiremployees “about the hazardous chemicals towhich they are exposed.” Employers may utilizetheir already existing hazard communicationprogram to communicate information on thesetypes of hazards to their employees, as perparagraph (e)(3).

4. Hazard Determination - Paragraph (d). Only chemicalmanufacturers and importers are required to performhazard determinations on all chemicals they produce orimport, although distributors and employers may choose todo so. Hazard determination procedures must be inwriting and made available, upon request, to employees,the National Institute for occupational Safety and Health


8

(NIOSH), and OSHA. Appendix C is provided as a guide foruse when assessing the hazard evaluation procedures.

a. Inspection Guidelines. The adequacy of a company’shazard determination program can be assessedprimarily by examining (or reviewing) the outcome ofthat determination; i.e., the accuracy and adequacyof the information on labels and MSDS. The writtenhazard evaluation procedures generally describe theprocess followed; they do not have to address eachchemical evaluated. The chemical manufacturer,importer, employer or distributor performing thehazard determination (“the preparer”), shall beasked to forward the written hazard determinationprocedures to the Area Director when they are notimmediately available at the establishment. Areasonable time period, not exceeding 5 workingdays, shall be allowed for receipt in the AreaOffice.

(1) Although not required, many companies will keeprecords of individual chemical evaluations. Inthe event of a finding by the CSHO of aninaccurate determination, as indicated byinaccurate information on the MSDS or label,these records may be useful in identifyingwhere the company’s evaluation differed fromOSHA’s, and for documentation of appropriateviolations.

(2) In general, the hazard evaluation proceduresshould address the following:

(a) The sources of information to beconsulted. Evaluators should have accessto a wide range of sources. While well-known chemicals could be adequatelyevaluated by consulting establishedreference texts, others will requiresearches of bibliographic data bases.

(b) Criteria to be used to evaluate thestudies, including those parametersaddressed by the HCS (i.e., statisticalsignificance; whether or not the


9

evaluation was conducted according toestablished scientific principles).

(c) A plan for reviewing information to updatethe MSDS if new and significant healthinformation is found.

(3) The hazard evaluation must include anassessment of both physical and health hazards. The chemical manufacturer or importer mustconsider the potential exposures that may occurwhen downstream employers use the product, andaddress the hazards that may result from thatuse on the labels and MSDS prepared for theproduct. It is important to note that employee“exposure” as defined by the HCS includes anyroute of entry (inhalation, ingestion, skincontact or absorption) and also includespotential (e.g., accidental or possible)exposure, including foreseeable emergencies. Only by considering all these factors can thechemical manufacturer or importer truly assessthe hazards encountered during anticipated useof his product. The mere presence of achemical in a product does not necessarilyresult in coverage; it must be available forexposure.

(4) Evaluations with respect to carcinogen labelingand MSDS notations are addressed in thoserespective sections below as well as inAppendix A which also contains specificinformation on mineral oils.

b. Citation Guidelines. Citations for violations ofparagraph (d)(1) shall be issued when the preparerhas failed to perform a hazard determination. Paragraphs (d)(2), (d)(3) and (d)(4) of the standardshall be used, as appropriate.

(1) If the preparer has developed MSDS but does nothave the written procedures available that wereused to determine the hazards of thechemical(s), then a violation of paragraph(d)(6) exists and shall be recommended forcitation.


10

(2) If the preparer has not developed an MSDS andno written procedures are available, thenapparent violations of both paragraphs (d)(1)and (d)(6) exist and shall be recommended forcitation. (Refer to K.7.b. of this instructionfor guidance.)

(3) Chemical manufacturers or importers are notrequired to test their products to evaluatetheir hazards. If a mixture has been tested,the resulting data would apply. If it has notbeen tested as a whole, the mixture is assumedto present the same hazards as its componentparts. If the employer chooses to rely onupstream chemical manufacturers’ hazarddeterminations for the component parts of hismixture, he may do so but must so specify inhis written hazard determination procedures. MSDS for each of the component parts must bephysically grouped together in order to meetthe chemical manufacturer’s hazarddetermination requirements. Certaininformation has to be provided for the mixtureas a whole for the combined MSDS; e.g.,identity, manufacturer’s name, address,

5. Written Hazard Communication Program, Paragraph (e). *CSHOs shall review the employer’s written hazardcommunication program to determine if all applicablerequirements of paragraph (e) have been addressed. TheHCS obligates all employers who may expose theiremployees to hazardous chemicals to develop a writtenprogram, regardless of whether or not they introduced thehazard into the workplace.

a. Inspection Guidelines. Ideally, and if readilyavailable, the written program should be reviewedfirst, prior to ascertaining whether the elements ofthe program have been implemented in the workplace.

(1) The CSHO shall determine whether or not theemployer has addressed the issues in sufficientdetail to ensure that a comprehensive approachto hazard communication has been developed.


11

(2) In general, the written program should considerthe following elements where applicable:

(a) Labels and Other Forms of Warning.

1 Designation of person(s) responsiblefor ensuring labeling of in-plantcontainers.

2 Designation of person(s) responsiblefor ensuring labeling on shippedcontainers.

3 Description of labeling system(s)used.

4 Description of written alternativesto labeling of in-plant containers,where applicable.

5 Procedures to review and update labelinformation when necessary.

(b) Material Safety Data Sheets.

1 Designation of person(s) responsiblefor obtaining/maintaining the MSDS.

2 How such sheets are to be maintained(e.g., in notebooks in the workarea(s), via a computer terminal, ina pick-up truck at the jobsite, viatelefax) and how employees obtainaccess to them.

3 Procedure to follow when the MSDS isnot received at the time of the firstshipment.

4 For chemical manufacturers orimporters, procedures for updatingthe MSDS when new and significanthealth information is found.


12

(c) Training.

1 Designation of person(s) responsiblefor conducting training.

2 Format of the program to be used(audiovisuals, classroom instruction,etc.).

3 Elements of the training program-compare to the elements required bythe HCS (paragraph (h)).

4 Procedures to train new employees atthe time of their initial assignmentand to train employees when a newhazard is introduced into theworkplace.

5 Procedures to train employees of newhazards they may be exposed to whenworking on or near another employer’sworksite (i.e., hazards introduced byother employees).

6 Guidelines on training programsprepared by the Office of Trainingand Education entitled “VoluntaryTraining Guidelines” (Vol. 49 FR30290, July 27, 1984) can be used toprovide general information on whatconstitutes a good training program.

(d) Additional Topics To Be Reviewed.

1 Does a list of the hazardouschemicals exist and if so, is itcompiled for each work area or forthe entire worksite and kept in acentral location?

2 Are methods the employer will use toinform employees of the hazards ofnon-routine tasks outlined?


13

3 Are employees informed of the hazardsassociated with chemicals containedin unlabeled pipes in their workareas?

4 Does the plan include the methods theemployer will use at multi-employerworksites to inform other employersof any precautionary measures thatneed to be taken to protect theiremployees?

5 For multi-employer workplaces, arethe methods the employer will use toinform the other employer(s) of thelabeling system used described?

6 Is the written program made availableto employees and their designatedrepresentatives?

b. Citation Guidelines. Generally, all violations ofparagraph (e) shall be grouped with the violatedelement(s) listed in the subparagraphs of (e) and/orviolations of paragraphs (f), (g) and (h) as appropriate,since (e)(l) is the only provision under paragraph (e)which addresses the development, implementation andmaintenance of the written hazard communication program. Specific citation guidance is seven below:

(1) Paragraph (e)(l) shall be cited by itself when noprogram exists (i.e., when no program has beendeveloped). Paragraph (e)(l) shall also be cited ininstances where the written program is notmaintained at a fixed worksite location. Forcertain mobile or multi-employer worksitesituations, see guidance given in Appendix A,Section (e)(2), discussion beginning on page A-15.

(2) When an employer’s written program exists but isfound to be deficient (i.e., has not beenimplemented as witnessed by the inadequacies of theother requirements of the standard), paragraph(e)(l) shall be cited and grouped as separateviolations with separate penalties with the elementsof the standard required in subparagraphs of (e)


14

and/or paragraphs of (f), (g), and/or (h). Anexample follows: An employer has developed a writtenprogram but it has not been implemented in theworkplace--no training has been provided and MSDSsare not available to employees. In this situationtwo separate violation items shall be recommendedfor citation: (e)(1) grouped with (h) as a separateviolation and penalty and (e)(l) grouped with (g)(8)as a second violation with separate appropriatepenalty.

(3) Paragraph (e)(l) shall also be cited when anemployer has not developed a written program and yetis exposing his employees to chemical hazards whichare known to be present in the workplace and whichare created by another employer.

(4) OSHA’s compliance and enforcement policies formulti-employer worksites are set forth in the FOM,Chapter V, Sections F.1 and 2., which state thatwith regard to working conditions where employees ofmore than one employer are exposed to a hazard, theemployers “with the responsibility for creating and/or correcting the hazard” shall be cited forviolations of OSHA standards that occur on a multi-employer worksite. In these situations, normallycitations for violations shall be issued to each ofthe exposing employers as well as to the employerresponsible for correcting or ensuring thecorrection of the condition (which is usually thecontrolling employer or general contractor).

6. Labels and Other Forms of Warning, Paragraph (f). *Labels or other markings on each container of chemicalsmust include the identity and appropriate hazardwarnings. Labels on shipped containers must also includethe name and address of the chemical manufacturer,importer, or other responsible party.

a. Inspection Guidelines. CSHOs shall determine thatcontainers are labeled, that the labels are legible,and that the labels are prominently displayed.

(1) Labels must be in English. Labels and MSDS mayalso be printed in additional languages.


15

(2) The accuracy of the label information is to beassessed for a representative number ofchemicals. The CSHO shall determine whetherthe label identity can be cross-referenced withthe MSDS and the list of hazardous chemicals.

(3) CSHOs must consider alternate labelingprovisions (for example tags or markings) forcontainers which are too small to accommodate alegible label.

(4) CSHOs shall evaluate the effectiveness of in-plant labeling systems through a review of theemployer’s training program and MSDSprocedures. Such evaluation shall includeinterviews with employees to determine theirfamiliarity with the hazards associated withchemicals in their workplace. An effectiveprogram is one that ensures that employees areaware of the hazardous effects (includingtarget organ effects) of the chemicals to whichthey are potentially exposed.

(5) Guidelines for referrals regarding inadequatelabels are dealt with in this instruction atK.7.a.(7) and (8).

b. Citation Guidelines. Chemical manufacturers shallbe cited for appropriate paragraphs (f)(l)(i)through (f)(l)(iii) of the standard whendeficiencies are found relating to products that areshipped downstream. Paragraphs (f)(5)(i) and(f)(s)(ii) of the standard shall be cited when ahazardous chemical is created and/or used only in-house. (See also K.7.b.)

7. Material Safety Data Sheets, Paragraph (g). The *standard requires chemical manufacturers and importers todevelop or obtain a material safety data sheet for eachhazardous chemical they produce or import.

a. Inspection Guidelines. Distributors and employersmay, at their option, develop MSDSs. CSHOs shouldinform them as well as chemical manufacturers andimporters that the Material Safety Data Sheet, OSHAForm 174, is available for this purpose. The CSHO


16

shall evaluate the compliance status of thisprovision by examining a sample of MSDSs todetermine that the MSDSs has been obtained ordeveloped and prepared in accordance with therequirements of paragraphs (g)(2)-(5) of thestandard and to ensure that the informationregarding the health and physical hazards istechnically accurate. If MSDSs are not updated whennew information becomes available, the hazarddetermination performed by the chemical manufactureror importer is deficient.

(1) The number of MSDSs and the particular MSDSselected for review will depend upon severalfactors, such as:

(a) The number of chemicals in the workplace.

(b) The severity of the hazards involved.

(c) The completeness of the MSDS in general.

(d) The volume of the chemicals used.

(2) The CSHO is to complete this review byfollowing the procedures outlined in HazardEvaluation Procedures Appendix C of thisinstruction. The CSHO shall also use availableliterature and computer references in the AreaOffice as well as Appendix D, Guide toReviewing MSDS Completeness, in reviewing MSDS.

NOTE: Published MSDS reference files arecopyrighted, and, therefore, must NOTbe copied for distribution to thepublic.

(3) In addition, each Area Office has access tophysical and health hazard data on the OSHAComputerized Information System (OCIS). If thehazard information is not available or cannotbe obtained in the Area Office, then theRegional Office shall be consulted. If theRegional Office does not have information onthe chemical in question, then the RegionalOffice shall contact the Technical Data Center.


17

(4) Published MSDSs, if used, are a screeningresource for the CSHO. The information onthese MSDSs has not been evaluated by OSHA todetermine if it is accurate or required inevery situation. They should be used to helpidentify which areas require further researchor where information is lacking on the MSDSbeing reviewed.

(5) The following items shall be considered whenreviewing the MSDSs:

(a) Do employers have an MSDS for eachhazardous chemical used?

(b) Does each MSDS contain information whichadequately addresses at least the 12elements required by the standard at(g)(2)(i)-(xii)?

(c) Are all sections of the MSDS accuratelycompleted?

(6) The CSHO shall ensure compliance with the MSDStransmission provisions of the standard byreviewing the chemical manufacturer’s,importer’s, or distributor’s program fortransmitting the MSDSs and updated MSDSs todownstream customers.

(7) Referral Procedures Where an Employer’s MSDS/Label is Inadequate or Deficient. Whereemployers are relying on the MSDS/labelsupplied by chemical manufacturers orimporters, the following procedures apply:

(a) Employers are not to be held responsiblefor inaccurate information on the MSDS/label which they did not prepare and theyhave accepted in good faith from thechemical manufacturer, importer ordistributor.

(b) The CSHO shall take copies of the MSDS/label with inaccurate information back tothe Area Office for referral to the


18

appropriate State Plan State or AreaOffice. Before making the referral, theArea Director shall write to the supplierrequesting action in 30 days or less usingthe sample letter in Appendix B of thisinstruction. As an option, the AreaOffice may call the supplier, but if aprompt response is not received, a lettershall be sent. This may be done even ifthe supplier is outside the jurisdictionalarea of the Area Office.

(c) If the manufacturer or supplier fails torespond within a reasonable time, areferral (OSHA-90 Form), with completebackground information attached, shall besent to the State Plan State or AreaOffice within whose jurisdiction thesupplier or manufacturer does business.

(d) The Area Office within whose jurisdictionthe upstream supplier or manufacturer islocated shall then ensure that anabbreviated (HCS) inspection is conductedor that a letter is written in accordancewith the referral procedures in the FOM,Chapter IX. B.3.b.

(e) The findings and the MSDS(s) and/or labelsobtained shall be sent to the referringoffice.

(f) The Regional Administrator shallcoordinate with State designees to ensurethat referrals from State plans arehandled in similar manner. OSHA will notact on a referral from a State if it isfor the purpose of obtaining an MSDS forinclusion in a State-maintained MSDS fileand/or repository.

(8) Referral Procedures for Distributors. When adistributor has not received an MSDS from thesupplier, the CSHO shall recommend that thedistributor write to the chemical manufacturer,and, if applicable, other distributor who


19

supplied the chemical. If at the end of theabatement period, the distributor has failed toreceive the MSDS, the Area Director shallfollow the referral procedures outlined inK.7.a.(7)(b) through (f) of this instruction.

b. Citation Guidelines. Citations shall be issued tothe employer only when MSDS/labels are missing.

(1) If MSDS/labels are missing or have not beenreceived for a hazardous chemical(s), theemployer shall be cited unless a good faitheffort has been made to obtain the information

(a) A copy of a letter or documentation of aphone call to the supplier are examples ofmethods for establishing a good faitheffort. An employer contacting OSHA forassistance in obtaining the missinginformation is also an excellent exampleof a good faith effort.

(b) Area Offices should expect to receiverequests from employers to assist them inobtaining MSDSs or labels in situationswhen an inspection has not been conducted. If the Area Director determines that theemployer has tried to obtain theinformation, and has not been able to doso, a letter and/or telephone call fromthe Area Office to the supplier ormanufacturer is the appropriate action inthis situation as well.

(c) If a citation will be issued to theemployer for lack of a MSDS/label, wherethe employer has failed to document that agood faith effort has been made to obtainthem, CSHOs shall recommend that theemployer write to both the direct supplierand to the manufacturer for the MSDS orlabel.

1 CSHOs shall inform employers that itis their responsibility to contactOSHA before the expiration of the


20

abatement date to request a petitionto modify abatement or else besubject to a failure to abate ifabatement is not accomplished. If atthe end of the abatement period theemployer still has failed to receivethe requested information, the AreaDirector shall call and/or send acertified letter to the manufacturer,importer, or distributor to obtainthe required information. (Seesample letter in Appendix B.)

2 If the distributor failed to transmitthe MSDS to the employer, thedistributor shall be cited forviolation of paragraph (g)(7) of thestandard with a short abatement dateunless the distributor did notreceive the MSDS from the chemicalmanufacturer, importer, ordistributor. In such cases theabatement period will generally be 30days.

(2) Any party who changes the label/MSDS (forexample, changing the name or identity of thechemical) then becomes the responsible partyfor the change regardless of whether they are achemical manufacturer, distributor or useremployer. In cases where a distributor adds its name to the MSDS and those MSDSs areinaccurate or incomplete, citations shall notbe issued to the distributor. Distributors,however, who substitute their names on the MSDSor change it in any way become the “responsibleparty” and must be able to supply the requiredadditional information on the hazardouschemical and appropriate emergency procedures,if necessary. Failure to be able to providethe additional information will result in aviolation of (g)(2)(xii) of the standard ifnoted upon inspection.

(3) On multi-employer worksites, citations forviolations of (g)(8) of the standard shall be


21

issued to the employer responsible forproviding or making the MSDS(s) available, asdiscussed below. A citation for violation of(e)(2) of the standard shall concurrently beissued in any of the instances listed wherethere is evidence that an employer has failedto effectively implement and enforce its hazardcommunication program.

(a) If an employer on a multi-employerworksite brings hazardous chemicals ontothat site and fails to inform otheremployers about the presence of thosechemicals and/or the availability of theMSDS(s), that employer shall be cited forviolation of (g)(8) grouped with (e)(2).

(b) Central Location. If the employer’smethod to provide other employers withMSDS(s) involves the use of a centrallocation, and the MSDS(s) is not availableat that location, then the employer shallbe cited for violation of (g)(8).

(c) Controlling Employer. If the employer’smethod involves using a general contractoror other employer as an intermediary forstorage of the MSDS(s), and thatintermediary employer has agreed to holdand provide ready access to the MSDS(s),then that other employer becomes thecontrolling employer, who is thenresponsible for ensuring the availabilityof the MSDS(s).

1 The controlling employer (e.g.,general contractor) shall thereforenormally be cited for violation of(g)(8) if the MSDS(s) is notavailable; able: however:

2 If the MSDS(s) is not availablebecause the subcontractor failed toprovide it, then the subcontractorshall instead be cited for violationof (g)(8).


22

(4) The FOM discusses penalty factors for shippedcontainers at Chapter IV, Section C.8.

8. Employee Information and Training. Paragraph (h). *

a. Inspection Guidelines. The training requirements ofthe HCS will generally complement rather thansatisfy the existing training requirements containedwithin other OSHA standards (i.e., expanded healthstandards, construction requirements, etc.).

(1) CSHOs shall continue to ensure that employers’obligations under specific training provisionsof other standards are met. There will also beinstances where there is an overlap in thetraining requirements of 29 CFR 1926.21, SafetyTraining and Education, and the HCS. In thoseinstances where the training deficiency iscovered by both standards (1926.21 and 1926.59)the CSHO shall issue a citation for 29 CFR1926.59, which is the more specific standard.

(2) Training programs must be evaluated throughprogram review and discussion with managementand employees. All elements of training andinformation stated in the standard must beaddressed. The following additional questionsprovide a general outline of topics to bereviewed:

(a) Has a training and information programbeen established for employees exposed tohazardous chemicals?

(b) Is this training provided at the time ofinitial assignment and whenever a newhazard is introduced into work areas?

(c) Have all new employees at this locationreceived training equivalent to therequired initial assignment training?

(d) Was training subject matter organized by:

1 Specific chemical?


23

2 Categories of hazard?

(3) The Voluntary Training Guidelines (Vol. 49 FR30290, July 27, 1984) may also be helpful inassessing the effectiveness of the employer’straining program.

(4) Employee interviews will provide generalinformation to the CSHO regarding the trainingprogram. Obviously, it cannot be expected thatemployees will totally recall all informationand be able to repeat it. Employees must beaware of what hazards they are exposed to, knowhow to obtain and use information on labels andMSDS, and know and follow appropriate workpractices. However, if the CSHO detects atrend in employee responses that indicatestraining is not being conducted, or isconducted in a cursory fashion that does notmeet the intent of the standard, a closerreview of the written program and itsimplementation may be necessary. The purposeof the standard is to reduce chemical sourceillnesses and injuries through the transmissionhazard information. This can occur only ifemployees receive the information in usableform through appropriate training.

(5) Paragraph (h) requires that information andtraining be provided to employees regarding thehazards of all chemicals in their work areasincluding by-products and hazardous chemicalsintroduced by another employer, provided thatthey are known to be present in such a mannerthat employees may be exposed under normalconditions of use or in a foreseeableemergency.

(6) Some employers will voluntarily keep records oftraining sessions. These could be helpful toCSHOs in assessing compliance with thestandard.

(7) Employers are required to ensure that trainingis provided. Employees may be trained byunions, in trade schools, etc. The employer is


24

responsible for ensuring they have beenproperly trained. If outside training sessionsare used to satisfy this requirement, and theCSHO determines that the employee has not beenadequately trained, the employer is subject tocitation.

b. Citation Guidelines. Citations shall be issuedunder paragraph (h) of the standard when training isfound to be inadequate through program review,discussion with management and employee interviews. The employer is always ultimately responsible forensuring that employees are adequately trained,regardless of the method relied upon to comply withthe training requirements.

9. Trade Secrets, Paragraph (I). Only specific chemicalidentities may be withheld under the HCS trade secretprovisions. Even when a chemical’s identity isrightfully withheld as a trade secret, its release may berequired by the trade secret access provisions inparagraph (I).

a. Inspection Guidelines. CSHOs evaluating the MSDSand hazard determination programs may requestdisclosure of trade secret identities underparagraph (I)(12) of the HCS. OSHA shall take allsteps feasible to protect trade secret identities,including secure filing and return of informationwhen its use is complete.

b. Citation Guidelines. Where OSHA believes that thechemical manufacturer, importer or employer will notbe able to support the trade secret claim, thewithholding of a specific chemical identity shall becited as a violation of paragraph (g)(2). WhereOSHA does not question the claim that a specificchemical identity is a trade secret, but theemployer has failed to comply with paragraph(I)(1)(I), (ii), (iii) or (iv), or with (I)(2) or(3), such failure shall be grouped with 1910.1200(g)(2), stating the deficiency in the AVD. Forexample, the employer claims a trade secret existsbut failed to indicate on the MSDS that the specificchemical was being withheld for that reason, asrequired under paragraph (I)(l)(iii).


25

10. Response to Medical Emergencies. The HCS permits atreating physician or nurse to designate the existence ofa medical emergency requiring the immediate disclosure oftrade secrets.

a. Inspection Guidelines. Referrals received fromtreating physicians and nurses relating to a medicalemergency shall normally be classified as imminentdanger or serious in accordance with the FOM,Chapter IX. Due to the potential risk to lifeand/or health, the Area Director shall ensure thatthese referrals are processed as soon as received. The Area Director or his/her designee shall contactthe manufacturer of the chemical by telephone. Telephone numbers are required on the MSDS. Themanufacturer shall be informed of the standard’srequirements and requested to immediately providethe needed information directly to the treatingphysician or nurse.

b. Citation Guidelines. Failure to disclose theinformation shall result in the issuance of awillful citation. The chemical manufacturer willfrequently be located under a different Area Officejurisdiction. Apparent violations shall be referredto the office of jurisdiction for investigation andthe issuance of citations. Concurrently, the AreaDirector of jurisdiction shall coordinate obtainingan administrative subpoena ordering the immediatedisclosure of the needed information. Federal CourtOrders shall be sought immediately if theadministrative subpoena is not effective inobtaining the information.

11. Response to Nonemergency Referrals. When healthprofessionals providing medical or other occupationalhealth services to exposed employees, or when employeesthemselves and/or their designated representatives aredenied access to trade secret information, the matter maybe referred to OSHA for enforcement proceedings.

a. As stipulated in the standard, OSHA should receivefrom the referring health professional, employee, ordesignated representative a copy of the writtenrequest for the trade secret information, as well asa copy of the written denial provided by the holder


26

of the trade secret. These two written documentsshall be reviewed by the Area Director to determinethe validity of the request and the trade secretclaim. The Regional Solicitor will provideassistance in this regard.

b. If the Area Director does not believe that there isenough information upon which to base a decision,he/she may contact either the trade secret requesteror the trade secret holder for further information. Such requests shall be documented in the case file.

L. Classification and Grouping of Violations. The procedures inthe FOM, Chapters IV, C.8., and V, C., shall be followedexcept as modified by this instruction; however, ifdeviations appear appropriate, they shall be coordinated withthe Directorate of Compliance Programs, Office of HealthCompliance Assistance, through the Regional Office. Thefollowing guidelines normally shall apply:

1. Citations for violations of paragraphs (e), (f), (g) and(h) of the standard shall be issued as separate itemswhen there is a complete lack of a hazard communicationprogram. Otherwise the guidance provided in the FOM orspecific guidance in this instruction shall be followed.

2. Serious violations shall be issued whenever a deficiencyin the program can contribute to a potential exposurecapable of causing death or serious physical harm. Inaddition, the CSHO must document that the employer knewor should have known of the violation.

a. Serious violations should be considered only whenthere is documentation which demonstrates that theemployer or downstream employer is using thechemical in a manner which could result in actual orpotential exposure capable of producing death orserious physical harm. The lack of a label or thelack of a training program alone for a specificchemical or type of hazard could result in asituation where exposure to that hazardous chemicalwithout these safeguards of the HCS would create aserious hazard.

b. Documentation of a HCS violation for a chemicalmanufacturer or importer could be in the form of a


27

referral generated as a result of OSHA’s observationof conditions of use resulting in employee exposureto the hazardous chemical at a downstream user’sworkplace.

3. Willful violations should be considered in accordancewith the guidelines of the FOM; i.e., the employercommitted an intentional and knowing violation of theAct.

a. The employer was aware that a hazardous conditionexisted and did not make a reasonable effort toeliminate the condition, and

b. The employer was aware that the condition violated astandard and was aware of the standard.

c. In addition, willful citations shall be issued whenan employer refuses to provide specific chemicalidentity information in a medical emergency (29 CFR1910.1200(I)(2)).

M. Interface With Other Standards. In some cases, an employer’sduties under other OSHA standards dovetail with requirementsof the HCS, resulting in simplified compliance.

1. Medical Records Access. The Access to Employee Exposureand Medical Records standard (29 CFR 1910.20) and the HCSoverlap with regard to MSDSs. MSDSs are specificallyidentified as exposure records under 29 CFR1910.20(c)(5)(iii). Each the MSDS received by anemployer must be maintained for at least 30 years asrequired at 1910.20(d)(1)(ii). The access standard doesoffer an alternative to keeping the MSDSs at1910.20(d)(1)(ii)(B), which reads as follows:

Material safety data sheets and paragraph (c)(5)(iv)records concerning the identity of a substance oragent need not be retained for any specified periodas long as some record of the identity (chemicalname if known) of the substance or agent, where itwas used, and when it was used is retained for atleast thirty (30) years.


28

Therefore, an employer may discard the original datasheet and retain only the new data sheet if a record ofthe original formulation is maintained.

a. Paragraph (e)(l)(I) of the HCS requires thatemployers maintain a list of hazardous chemicals aspart of the written hazard communication.

b. Employers might simplify their responsibilities asthey relate to the overlap between these twostandards by incorporating the requirements under1910.20(d)(1)(ii)(B) with those for the HCSparagraph (e)(l)(I). That is, the list of hazardouschemicals could include information on wherechemicals were used and when they were used. Theselists would then have to be kept for at least 30Years.

c. Section (e)(4) of the HCS requires employers to makethe written hazard communication program availableupon request to employees, their representatives,OSHA or NIOSH, in accordance with the requirementsat 1910.20 (e). The standard, 1910.20 (e), requiresthe employer to provide a copy of the requestedrecord (in this case, a copy of the written hazardcommunication program) “in a reasonable time...butin no event later than fifteen (15) days....” Someemployers have incorrectly interpreted this to meanthat they have 15 days to produce a copy of thewritten program and make it available at theworksite. This is an incorrect interpretation; theintent behind the (e)(4) requirements of the HCS isto allow the employer up to 15 days to provide awritten (photo or other) copy of the program toemployees who request it. This does not mean theemployer has 15 days in which to get the program tothe worksite for employees to access. The writtenprogram must be available to employees at theworksite at all times, as per 1910.1200 (e)(l). (See Appendix A, discussion at (e)(2) page A-15.)

2. Air Contaminants. OSHA enforcement of the new AirContaminants rule was effective September 1, 1989. Chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors oremployers who prepare MSDS were responsible forincorporating the changes precipitated by the new


29

standards within three (3) months. Therefore, all MSDSand labels must already have been modified if affected bythis rulemaking and such modifications of both PEL(including STEL and skin notations) and health hazarddata must now appear on the revised MSDS and labels, asappropriate.

3. 29 CFR 1910.1450, Occupational Exposure to HazardousChemicals in Laboratories. Quality control laboratoriesare usually adjuncts of production operations and are notcovered under the Laboratory Standard, but rather wouldbe covered under the HCS. For other laboratories coveredunder the Laboratory Standard, the requirements of theHCS are superseded (the more specific standard,1910.1450, takes precedence). Both the training andinformation and the hazard identification requirements ofthe Laboratory Standard are more extensive than the HCSlaboratory requirements.

4. Other Health Standards. Paragraph (f)(4) of the HCSreferences labeling requirements of substance-specificstandards. Employers must comply with these substancespecific standards. For example, the ethylene oxide(ETO) standard provides a different labeling requirementthan the HCS. Labels do not have to be affixed tocontainers of ETO unless the product is capable ofproducing employee exposure at or above the action levelof 0.5 ppm as an 8-hour time weighted average (29 CFR1910.1047 (I)(1)(ii)).

N. Evaluation. In keeping with agency policy, an evaluation ofthe effectiveness of this instruction shall be conductedannually. An evaluation report from each Region shall bewritten and submitted to the Directorate of CompliancePrograms within 30 days of the close of the fiscal year. Elements to be considered in the evaluation are thefollowing:

1. Are enforcement and citation policies clear?

2. Are particular problems not addressed or inadequatelyaddressed in this instruction?

3. Are parts of this instruction not useful?


30

Gerard F. ScannellAssistant Secretary

DISTRIBUTION: National, Regional, and Area OfficesCompliance OfficersState DesigneesNIOSH Regional Program Directors7(c)(1) Project Managers


A-1

Appendix A

Clarifications and Interpretations of the Hazard CommunicationStandard (HCS).

This appendix includes clarifications and interpretations whichrespond to the most frequently asked questions and points ofcommon misunderstanding. Where possible, clarifications arekeyed to the most applicable paragraph of the HCS. In many casesa clarification applies to an entire paragraph of the standard. These are included after each section.

Purpose.

(a)(2) OSHA’s position is that State standards can be enforcedonly under the auspices of an OSHA-approved State plan. States without State plans are preempted fromaddressing the issue of Hazard Communication. Community right-to-know standards are outside thejurisdiction of OSHA and are not affected by thisposition. Inquiries regarding preemption that requirein depth knowledge of this subject shall be referredthrough the Directorate of Compliance Programs to theOffice of State Programs for response.

The agency’s position regarding State standards hasbeen described in OSHA Instruction STP 2-1.117. Thisshould be consulted when answering questions regardingsuch State standards.

Scope and Application.

(b)(1) The HCS has a unique requirement for downstreamdisclosure of information from chemical manufacturersand importers to employers receiving their products. This downstream flow of information is essential to thecomplete implementation of the standard, but doescreate enforcement situations that have not beenencountered with previous standards. The CSHO’sfamiliarity with the procedures established in thisinstruction to address such situations is essential toimplementation of the HCS.

(b)(2) The phrase “known to be present” is essential tounderstanding the scope of the standard. If ahazardous chemical is known to be present by the


A-2

chemical manufacturer or the employer, it is covered bythe standard. This includes chemicals to whichemployees may be exposed during normal operations or ina foreseeable emergency. This means that even thoughan employer did not create the hazard, such as silicaexposure during concrete demolition, or the hazards ofexposure to the chemicals brought onto a multi-employerworksite by other employer(s), the standard applies andthe employer whose employees are exposed to chemicalsknown to be present should include hazard communicationinformation about these exposure situations in hisworkplace hazard communication program.

By-products are also covered by the HCS. Employers’hazard determination procedures must anticipate thedownstream use of their products and account for anyhazardous by-products which may be formed. Forexample, a manufacturer of gasoline must informdownstream users of the hazards of carbon monoxide,since carbon monoxide is a hazardous chemical and is a“known to be present” by-product resulting from the useof gasoline. Similarly, manufacturers of diesel fuelmust inform downstream users of the potential humancarcinogenicity of diesel exhaust on the MSDSs fordiesel fuel. (See NIOSH Current Intelligence BulletinNo. 50, August, 1988.)

The terminology “exposed under normal conditions of useor in a foreseeable emergency” excludes products orchemicals that do not meet this condition. Forexample, a chemical that is inextricably bound in amixture and presents no potential for exposure wouldnot be covered. This paragraph must be read inconjunction with the definition of exposure whichspecifically includes potential (either accidental orpossible) exposure. (See the FOM for guidance onciting potential exposure.) Further, employees such asoffice workers who encounter chemicals only in non-routine, isolated instances are not covered. However,an office worker who works in a graphic arts departmentand routinely uses paints, adhesives, etc., would becovered by the HCS.

OSHA has never considered either radioactivity orbiological hazards to be covered by the HCS. If,however, another type of hazard is presented along with


A-3

the material (e.g., a container with a biologicalsample packed in a hazardous solvent), then thecontainer would be subject to the requirements of theHCS for the other hazardous chemical.

(b)(3) The coverage of laboratories is limited under the HCS. Although the standard does not specifically define theterm “laboratory”, it is intended to mean a workplacewhere relatively small quantities of hazardouschemicals are used on a nonproduction basis; i.e.,bench-scale operations. The definition would includeresearch facilities as well as quality controllaboratory operations located within manufacturingfacilities. Establishments, however, which producesamples or chemical standards to be sent out to otheremployers covered by the HCS would not fall under thestandard’s term for a laboratory. Those employers whoship hazardous chemicals would be considered eitherchemical manufacturers or distributors and must labelin accordance with paragraph (f)(1) and provide MSDSper paragraphs (g)(6) and (g)(7).

29 CFR 1910.1450, Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals inLaboratories, addresses hazard communicationrequirements in laboratories. It is consistent withthe HCS, but also has some additional requirements thatmust be applied in laboratories covered by that rule. The operating definition of a laboratory is not thesame for both standards. 29 CFR 1910.1450 covers onlylaboratories meeting criteria of “laboratory use” and“laboratory scale” and excludes procedures that arepart of a production process (55 FR 3328). Thepreamble to 29 CFR 1910.1450 states “... most qualitycontrol laboratories are not expected to meet thequalification for coverage under the LaboratoryStandard. Quality control laboratories are usuallyadjuncts of production operations...” (55 FR 3312). Quality control laboratories would therefore generallybe covered by the HCS.

Under the HCS, laboratories do not have to have awritten hazard communication program. Therefore, whenthe required training is performed, the part that dealswith the program availability will simply point outthat such written programs are not required forlaboratories.


A-4

Some manufacturers of chemical specialty products haveinterpreted the laboratory provisions as exempting themfrom coverage. These operations are considered to bemanufacturing processes, and are not exempted. Furthermore, a pilot plant operation is also consideredto be a manufacturing operation, not a researchlaboratory operation. In addition, establishments suchas dental, photofinishing, and optical laboratoriesclearly are not considered laboratory operations forthe purposes of this standard since they are engaged inthe production of a finished product.

Quality control samples taken in a plant must belabeled, tagged, or marked unless the person taking thesample is also going to be performing the analysis, andthus the sample would come under the portable containerexemption. A hand-written label may be utilized aslong as required label information is present. Therack in which samples are placed could be labeled inlieu of labeling individual samples if the contents andhazards are similar.

(b)(4) Since all containers are subject to leakage andbreakage, employees who work in operations where theyhandle only sealed containers (such as warehousing) arepotentially exposed to hazardous chemicals andtherefore need access to information as well astraining. The training required for employees whohandle sealed containers is dependent upon the type ofchemicals involved, the potential size of any spills orleaks, the type of work performed and what actionsemployees are expected to take when a spill or leakoccurs.

Employers are required to obtain a MSDSs for chemicalsin sealed containers if an employee requests one. Theemployer’s attempt must begin promptly (within a day)in order to be consistent with the requirement thatavailable sheets be accessible during each shift in thework area.

(b)(5) These exemptions apply to labeling requirements of theHCS only and are not intended to provide a completeexemption from the standard.


A-5

(b)(6) This paragraph totally exempts certain categories ofsubstances from coverage under the HCS. Hazardouswaste is completely exempted from the standard whensubject to regulation by the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), under the Resource Conservation andRecovery Act (RCRA). If the waste is not regulatedunder RCRA, then the requirements of the standardapply. Once the material is designated as hazardouswaste as defined under RCRA, it is totally exempted. Other chemicals which are used by employees at ahazardous waste site that are not hazardous waste arecovered under the HCS. (An example would be an acidbrought on site by the employer to neutralize a wasteproduct.)

Under the current rule, whenever a consumer product isused in a manner that is not comparable to typicalconsumer use, it is covered by the HCS. The standardrequires the employer to ascertain whether theworkplace use is more frequent, or of longer durationthan would be expected in normal consumer use. Exposures in these situations would be greater, andthus the need increases for additional information foremployee protection. The use of cans of spray paintduring production runs rather than for occasional,short, one-time applications that typify consumer useis an example of hazardous chemical use which would notqualify as consumer product use.

The key to the definition of “article,” and thus theexemption, is the term “under normal conditions ofuse.” For example, an item may meet the definition of“article,” but produces a hazardous by-product if cutor burned. If the cutting or burning or otherwiseprocessing the article in such a way as to result inemployee exposure to a hazardous chemical is notconsidered part of its normal conditions of use, theitem would be an “article” under the standard, and thusbe exempted.

As mentioned in the preamble to the August 24, 1987rule, exposures to releases of “very small quantities”;e.g., a trace amount, are not considered to be coveredby the HCS. Thus, absent evidence that releases ofsuch “very small quantities” could cause health effectsin employees, the article exception to the rule’s


A-6

requirements would apply. The following items areexamples of articles:

Stainless steel tableVinyl upholsteryTiresAdhesive tape

The following items are examples of products whichwould NOT be considered “articles” under the standard,and would thus not be exempted from the requirements:

Metal ingots that will be melted under normalconditions of use.

Bricks for use in construction operations, since,under normal condition of use, bricks are cut orsawed, thereby resulting in exposure tocrystalline silica.

Switches with mercury in them that are installedin a maintenance process when it is known that acertain percent break under normal conditions ofuse.

Lead acid batteries which have the potential toleak, spill or break during normal conditions ofuse, including foreseeable emergencies. Inaddition, lead acid batteries have the potentialto emit hydrogen which may result in a fire orexplosion upon ignition.

It should be noted that the only information that hasto be reported in these situations is that whichconcerns the hazard of the released chemical. Thehazardous chemicals which are still bound in thearticle would continue to be exempted under the“article” exemption.

The wood and wood products exemption was never intendedby OSHA to exclude wood dust from coverage. This factwas clarified in the preamble to the final rulepublished August 24, 1987. (See Federal Register, Vol.52, No. 163, page 31863.) The permissible exposurelimits for wood dust recently adopted under OSHA’s PELProject must be included on the MSDSs, which will


A-7

generally be developed by the sawmill. Further, anychemical additives present in the wood which representa health hazard must also be included on the MSDSsand/or label as appropriate.

Definitions.

(c) The definitions of the HCS must be heavily relied upon toproperly interpret and apply the standard. In many casesterms within a definition are themselves defined within thesame section.

Article. The definition has been interpreted to permit therelease of very small quantities of a hazardous chemical andstill qualify as an article provided that a physical or healthrisk is not posed to the employees. Examples of very smallquantities would be the release of a few molecules or traceamounts of a hazardous chemical (52 FR 31865).

Chemical Manufacturer. Based on this definition and that of itsrelated terms, an employer that manufactures, processes,formulates, or repackages a hazardous chemical is considered a“chemical manufacturer.” This definition includes someone whoblends or mixes chemicals; such persons may comply with thestandard by merely transmitting the relevant label/MSDSs for theingredients, which they received in good faith from theirsuppliers, to their downstream customers. Oil and gas producersare chemical manufacturers for the purposes of the HCS becausethey process hazardous chemicals for use or distribution.

For substances which are grown, cultivated, or harvested andwhich are not processed by the grower before being sold, thefirst employer meeting the definition of “chemical manufacturer”will be responsible for performing the hazard determination,developing or obtaining the MSDSs, and labeling containers of thehazardous chemicals. For example, saw mills and grain elevatorswill be considered to be the “chemical manufacturer” since theyare the first employers who meet the definition. A saw millprocesses timber into lumber (meets definition of “produce”)thereby creating wood dust in the process, which is a hazardouschemical under the HCS. Grain elevators will also meet thedefinition of a “chemical manufacturer” since they treat,dry,_and move grain, creating grain dust (which is also ahazardous chemical under the standard).


A-8

Commercial Account. A commercial account is an arrangementwhereby a retail distributor sells hazardous chemicals to anemployer, generally in large quantities over time and at coststhat are below the regular retail price.

Container. This definition includes tank trucks and rail cars. A room or an open area is not to be considered a container and,therefore, a hazardous chemical such as wood dust on the floor ofa workplace, or a pile of sand at a construction site, would nothave to be labeled. Since only “containers” need to be labeledunder the HCS, if there is no container, there is no requirementto label.

Pipes or piping systems, engines, fuel tanks, or other operatingsystems in a vehicle are not considered to be containers. Thus,LP cylinders that serve as the source of fuel used to operatelift trucks, for example, would not have to be labeled once thefuel tank is installed, although the spare LP cylinder(s) instorage must be labeled since they are containers. Althoughcontainers of fuel such as gasoline and LP clearly are within thescope of the HCS, no requirement exists to label the lift truck. The producer still has an obligation to assess the hazardsassociated with the fuels, including their by-products.

The standard requires all containers of hazardous chemicalsleaving the workplace to be labeled with the requiredinformation. Even very small containers must be tagged or markedin a fashion that fulfills the intent of the standard.

Distributor. A distributor who blends, mixes or otherwisechanges the chemical composition of a chemical is to beconsidered a chemical manufacturer under the HCS. As a result,employees in those operations are to be considered just likeother employees who use hazardous chemicals. A distributor,therefore, performing a chemical manufacturing operation (i.e.,blending, mixing, etc.) becomes a chemical manufacturer and willprobably need to give additional training to those employeesperforming the manufacturing operation since the distributor willnot be able to satisfy the sealed container provision inparagraph (b)(4) and invoke its limited requirements.

Employee. Employees, such as office workers or bank tellers whoencounter hazardous chemicals only in non-routine, isolatedinstances are not covered. For example, a worker whooccasionally changes the toner in a copying machine would not becovered by the standard. However, an employee who operates a


A-9

copying machine on a full-time basis would be covered by theprovisions of the HCS for any hazardous chemicals used.

Exposure. It is important to note, especially for purposes ofchemical manufacturers’ hazard determinations, that “exposure”includes any route of entry (inhalation, ingestion, skin contactor absorption) and includes potential (accidental or possible)exposure including exposure that could result in the event of aforeseeable emergency.

Hazard Determination.

(d)(1) Although the chemical manufacturer and the importerhave the primary duty for hazard evaluation, it isexpected that some employers will choose to do theirown evaluations. Whoever does the evaluation isresponsible for the accuracy of the information. Theevaluation must assess the hazards associated with thechemicals including those hazards related to anyanticipated or known use which may result in workerexposure.

Known intermediates and by-products are covered by theHCS. Decomposition products which are produced duringthe normal use of the product or in foreseeableemergencies (e.g., plastics which are injection molded,diesel fuel emissions) are covered if the hazardouschemicals are known to be present. “Foreseeableemergency” does not include employee exposures in theevent of an accidental fire, but does include equipmentfailure, rupture of containers, or failure of controlequipment which could result in an uncontrolled releaseof a hazardous chemical.

An employer may rely upon the hazard determinationperformed by the chemical manufacturer. Normally, thechemical manufacturer possesses knowledge of hazardousintermediates, by-products and decomposition productsthat can be emitted from his chemical product. However, if the employer obtains information regardingthe hazards from a source other than the manufacturer,the employer is responsible for including suchinformation in his hazard communication program.

(d)(2) The preparer of the MSDSs/labels is required toconsider all available scientific evidence concerning


A-10

the hazard(s) of a chemical in addition to consultingthe floor reference sources listed in paragraph (d)(3)of the standard. (See Appendix C of this instructionfor further guidance on evaluating health effects.) Notesting of chemicals to determine hazards is everrequired; the evaluation is to be based on informationcurrently available in the literature.

Where at least one positive scientific study existswhich is statistically significant and demonstratesadverse health effects, the MSDSs must include theadverse health effects found. This does notnecessarily mean that the results of all such studieswould also appear on the label.

The standard’s definition of “chemical” is much broaderthan that which is commonly used. Thus, steel coilswhich are cut and processed, castings which aresubsequently ground or welded upon, carbide bladeswhich are sharpened, and portland cement, which is botha skin and eye irritant, are all examples of chemicalswhich would normally be covered since exposure tohazardous chemicals would occur in the workplace.

Any substance which is inextricably bound in a productis not covered under the HCS. For example, a hazarddetermination for a product containing crystallinesilica may reveal that it is bound in a rubberelastomer and under normal conditions of use or duringforeseeable emergencies cannot become airborne andtherefore cannot present an inhalation hazard. In sucha situation, the crystalline silica need not beindicated as a hazardous ingredient since it cannotresult in employee exposure.

(d)(3) Any compound of a substance regulated in part 1910,Subpart Z, including those listed in the Z Tables orfor which there is a TLV in the latest edition of theACGIH, Threshold Limit values listing, is considered tobe part of the floor of hazardous chemicals covered bythe standard.

Nuisance Dust or Particulates. The term “nuisancedust” is no longer used in 1910.1000. A number ofparticulates now have specific PELs and are covered bythe HCS. The particulates not otherwise regulated are


A-11

exempt unless evidence exists that they present ahealth or physical hazard other than physical irritanteffects. For these chemicals, the “Particulates nototherwise regulated” PELs must be included on theMSDSs.

(d)(4) On December 20, 1985, OSHA published an interpretivenotice in the Federal Register regarding thecarcinogenicity of lubricating oils (VOL. 50 FR 51852). The notice was published in response to a number ofinquiries which were received regarding theapplicability of the HCS requirements to naphtheniclubricating oils which are refined using ahydrotreatment process. These types of oils may befound in a number of industrial operations, includingink manufacture and the production of synthetic rubber.

Positive findings of carcinogenicity by theInternational Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) mustbe reported under the HCS. The IARC Monograph 33concludes that there is sufficient evidence to indicatethat mildly hydrotreated and mildly solvent refinedoils are carcinogenic. Therefore, under therequirements of the HCS, producers of such materialsmust report such findings on the MSDSs for thesubstance and include appropriate hazard warnings onlabels.

IARC also stated that there is inadequate evidence toconclude that severely hydrotreated oils arecarcinogenic, and that there is no evidence to indicatethat severely solvent-refined oils are carcinogenic. In the absence of any valid, positive evidence fromsources other than IARC regarding the carcinogenicityof severely hydrotreated or severely solvent-refinedoils, no reference to carcinogenicity need be includedon the MSDSs and labels for such materials. IARC hasalso concluded that when an oil is refined usingsequential processing of mild hydrotreatment and mildsolvent refining, there is no evidence ofcarcinogenicity.

The questions posed to OSHA concerned the processparameters used for mild hydrotreatment. OSHA examinedthe studies upon which IARC based its positive findingsof carcinogenicity to determine the process parameters


A-12

used to refine the oils studied. Any oil will beconsidered to be mildly hydrotreated if thehydrotreatment process was conducted using pressures of800 pounds per square inch or less, and temperatures of800 degrees Fahrenheit or less, independent of otherprocess parameters. If the oil is being producedwithin the specified parameters, it must be consideredto be potentially carcinogenic under the requirementsof the HCS.

It should also be noted that negative evidencegenerated by a producer does not negate the positiveIARC finding and cannot be used to dispute positivefindings relating to any substance. The producer isfree to report any negative findings as well, but thereis a positive duty to report IARC’s conclusions.

(d)(5) While the HCS does not require testing of chemicals todetermine their hazards, some preparers of MSDSs areapparently considering testing mixtures as a whole soas not to have to list individual hazardous ingredientson the MSDSs. Should employers choose to pursue thisoption; i.e., to test the mixture as a whole, a fullrange of tests would have to be performed, includingtests to determine health hazards (acute and chronic)and physical hazards. Employers may also choose totest for certain hazards or properties and rely on theliterature for published information on the otherhazards. Compliance officers can expect to see MSDSswhich use both the tested and untested mixtureapproaches; e.g., perhaps an employer has determined aflashpoint for the mixture, but has not tested it forhealth hazards but has relied instead on information inthe published literature for this section of the MSDSs. Such an approach to hazard determination is acceptableunder the HCS. Where the physical characteristics havenot been objectively determined, the employer maypresent data on the components in ranges; e.g., flashpoints range from 70 to 100 degrees fahrenheit.

(d)(6) Employers who are not planning to evaluate the hazardsof chemicals they purchase can satisfy the requirementfor written hazard evaluation procedures by stating intheir written program that they intend to rely on theevaluations of the chemical manufacturer or importer.


A-13

Downstream employers/employees do not have access tothe written procedures maintained by the chemicalmanufacturer/importer. If there appears to be aproblem with the information received, and it cannot beresolved with the supplier of the product, the mattershould be referred to OSHA for investigation. OSHAdoes have access to the written procedures.

Written Hazard Communication Program.

(e)(1) All employers with employees who are, or may be,exposed to hazardous chemicals known to be present intheir workplaces, must develop, implement, and maintainat primary workplace facilities and fixed worksitelocations a written hazard communication program. Programs must be developed whether the employergenerates the hazard or the hazard is generated byother employers. An effective program is one thatpromotes the safe handling and use of hazardouschemicals in the workplace.

(e)(2) Although a multi-employer worksite is not defined inthe HCS, it is intended to mean those establishmentswhere employees of more than one employer areperforming work and are exposed to hazardous chemicals. The MSDSs information exchange or access requirementspertain to employers who introduce hazardous chemicalsinto the worksite and expose another employer’semployees.

All types of worksites may be “multi-employerworksites,” not just construction sites. For example,a manufacturing employer becomes the “exposingemployer” if he produces, uses or stores chemicals insuch a way that he may expose the employees of anotheremployer to hazardous substances. Now that the HCS isin effect in all industry sectors, an exposing employermust advise outside contractors working at his plantabout the hazardous chemicals that the contractor’semployees may be exposed to and vice versa.

Paragraph (e)(2)(I) requires an employer on a multi-employer worksite to provide other employers with acopy of pertinent MSDSs or to make them available at acentral location in the workplace. This requirementcovers each hazardous chemical to which the other


A-14

employer’s employees may be exposed. Therefore, oneemployer does not actually have to physically giveanother employer the MSDSs, but the employer mustinform the other employer of the location where theMSDSs will be maintained (e.g., in the generalcontractor’s trailer). The performance-orientation ofthe rule allows employers to decide the method to beused to accomplish the required exchange ofinformation.

In the construction industry, it would probably be mostefficient for the general contractor to coordinate therequirement for maintaining MSDSs on site. Forexample, the general contractor could keep and makeavailable MSDSs in the office on the site.

An employer must provide MSDS(s) to other employers ormake them available in a central location if the otheremployers will have employees exposed or potentiallyexposed. The potential exposure could even occur atsome time in the future. For example, if a paintingcontractor’s workers are using flammable solvents in anarea where another subcontractor’s workers are weldingpipes, then the painting contractor must ensure thatthe MSDSs for the flammable solvents are available tothe welding subcontractor’s employees However, ifelectricians are not working near or at the same timeas the painting contractor, and therefore it is notpossible for either employer’s employees to be exposed,then no exchange of MSDSs is required.

The HCS’s “multi-employer workplaces” provision at(e)(2) states that employers who produce, use or storehazardous chemicals at a worksite in such a way thatthe employees of other employers may be exposed mustinclude in their written hazard communication programthe methods to ensure that the other employer areadequately informed of the hazards and appropriateprecautionary measures to be taken so they can protecttheir own employees.

The intent of the HCS is met on multi-employerworksites when information on the hazards of chemicalsubstances at the worksite is available to all affectedemployers and employees. All employers with employeespotentially exposed to hazardous chemicals therefore


A-15

must have in place an effective written hazardcommunication program that details how this intent willbe met.

If an employer does not bring hazardous chemicals onsite, a list of hazardous chemicals is not required aspart of his hazard communication program. Nevertheless, the employees must be trained how to uselabels and MSDSs, to recognize hazards and to followappropriate protective measures.

An exception to the requirement that the written hazardcommunication (HCP) be kept on-site on multi-employerworksites may be found in situations where an employeeor employees must travel between workplaces or wheretheir work is carried out at more than one geographicallocation, yet who, at some time, report to a primaryworkplace facility where the written HCP is maintained. The standard sets forth, at (e)(l), a positiverequirement for the written program to be maintained“at the workplace.” OSHA has interpreted thisrequirement to mean that the written program must bekept on-site, at all times, or even in the work truckof employees who travel between worksites.

However, the Agency has proposed, in the 1988 Notice ofProposed Rulemaking, to add a new subparagraph to theparagraph (e) requirements to allow the written programto be maintained at a “central location at the primaryworkplace facility” for employees who travel betweenworkplaces during a workshift (proposed new paragraph(e)(5)). The final rule presently allows MSDSs to bemaintained at the central workplace for employees whotravel between workplaces during a workshift (paragraph(g)(g)). The (g)(9) provisions also require thatemployees have immediate access to information in anemergency which is important since MSDSs must bereadily accessible to employees in the event of anemergency, accidental leak, spill, etc.

Unlike the immediate need for MSDSs information to bereadily accessible to employees while they are in theirwork area(s), the information contained in anemployer’s written HCP is mainly procedural and itspresence on the worksite other than a fixed locationmay not have a direct or immediate relationship to


A-16

employee safety or health. This is especially true insituations where employers are implementing aneffective overall HCP and whose employees have alreadyreceived the required hazard communication training. This means that employees are aware of the requirementsof the employer’s HCP, including being familiar withthe list of hazardous chemicals known to be present,the labeling system in use, the presence of andaccessibility to MSDSs, and have been trained inaccordance with paragraph (h) requirements. The needfor the program to be on-site, therefore, in situationswhere employees travel or are dispatched from a primaryworkplace location (e.g., administrative offices) wherethe written program is maintained to a multi-employerworksite may bear no immediate relationship to safetyand health and may, in the professional judgment of theCSHO and Area Director, be considered a “de minimis”violation of section (e)(l). (See the FOM, Chapter IV,B.6., pages IV 30-31.)

This citation policy change applies even in situationswhere the employee does not return to the primaryworkplace during the workshift as long as theemployee(s) is aware of the content of the program andthe methods the program contains that affect thesharing of the hazard communication informationrequired at (e)(2)(I-iii). Stated in another way, ifhazard communication information (accessibility ofMSDSs, the employer’s labeling system, etc.) is notbeing shared with other on-site employers and theemployees are unaware of the methods outlined in theprogram which have been developed to accomplish thisintent, then the need for the program to be on-sitewould bear a direct relationship to safety and healthand the absence of the program on-site would not be a“de minimis” violation.

At fixed worksite locations, the requirement for thewritten hazard communication program to be maintainedon-site and readily accessible to employees remains. Again, an effective program is one that promotes thesafe handling and use of hazardous chemicals in theworkplace. Its immediate presence in other than fixedworksite locations bears a direct relationship tosafety and health only when its procedural direction isnecessary to direct the employers in their


A-17

implementation of the overall hazard communicationprogram’s requirements.

OSHA’s compliance and enforcement policies for multi-employer worksites are set forth in the FOM, Chapter V,sections F.1. and 2., which state that, with regard toworking conditions where employees of more than oneemployer are exposed to a hazard, the employers “withthe responsibility for creating and/or correcting thehazard” shall be cited for violations of OSHA standardsthat occur on that multi-employer worksite. Normallycitations for violations shall be issued to each of theexposing employers as well as to the employerresponsible for correcting or ensuring the correctionof the condition.

Whenever the general contractor or the constructionmanager on a multi-employer worksite is in the bestposition to ensure that all contractors on site withhazardous materials comply with the standard’srequirements, the general contractor or constructionmanager shall be cited for violations of the HCS aswell as any contractor who has not complied.

(e)(4) Paragraph (e)(4) requires employers to make the writtenprogram available upon request to employees, OSHA andNIOSH, in accordance with the requirements of theAccess Standard, 29 CFR 1910.20(e). This requirementis interpreted to apply to the requirement of theemployer to provide a copy of the written programwithin the time periods discussed in 1910.20 (i.e., nolater than 15 days after the request for access ismade). It is not meant to allow an employer of aprimary workplace facility or a fixed location worksitea 15-day time period in which to make the programavailable for inspection on-site. For fixed worksitesand primary workplace facilities, the written hazardcommunication program must be maintained on-site at alltimes. OSHA interprets the 15-day period referenced in(e)(4) to pertain to the length of time the employerhas in which to provide a copy of the program to therequesting party. (See discussion at subparagraph(e)(2) of this Appendix for OSHA citation policyregarding the maintenance of written programs on multi-employer or mobile worksite locations.)


A-18

Labels and Other Forms of Warning.

(f)(1) The purpose for labels under the standard is clear. and Labels provide an immediate warning to employees of the(f)(5) hazards they may be exposed to and, through the

chemical identity, labels provide a link to moredetailed information available through MSDSs and othersources. Labels must contain the identity of thechemical, an appropriate hazard warning, and the nameand address of the responsible party.

OSHA recognizes that the degree of detail on a labelneeded to convey a hazard may be different within aworkplace where other information is readily available,compared to labels required on shipped containers,where the label may be the only information available.

The standard’s preamble recognizes the existence ofnumerous labeling systems that are currently in use inindustry. Examples include the HMIS (HazardousMaterials Information System), NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and ANSI (American NationalStandards Institute) systems. Some of these systemsrely on a numerical and/or alphabetic codes to conveythe hazards. Although these labeling systems may notconvey the target organ effects, the intent of thestandard is to permit the use of these systems forinplant labeling as long as the written HazardCommunication Program adequately addresses the issue.

Paragraph (e)(1) of the HCS requires employers toinclude in their written hazard communication program adescription of how the training requirements ofparagraph (h) will be met, and subparagraph (e)(2)(ii)requires employees to be trained on the physical andhealth hazards of the chemicals they work with. OSHAhas interpreted this to include being apprised of thetarget organ effects of the hazardous chemicalsemployees are or may be exposed to while working. Thetraining program must therefore explicitly instructemployees on how to use and understand the plant’salternative labeling systems to ensure that employeesare aware of the effects (including target organeffects) of the hazardous chemicals to which they arepotentially exposed.


A-19

CSHOs must carefully review the overall hazardcommunication program to ensure its effectiveness inmeeting all the requirements of the HCS. One way forCSHOs to determine the effectiveness of the trainingprogram, including employee understanding of targetorgan effects, especially when numerical or othersystems are used for in-plant labeling, is throughemployee interviews. An employer relying on one of theabove-mentioned labeling systems may therefore have toaugment his hazard communication training program tospecifically address the target organ effects that maynot be easily discernable from a numerical warningsystem.

However, for shipped containers the hazard warning mustbe included on the label and must specifically conveythe hazards of the chemical. OSHA has consistentlymaintained that this includes target organ effects. Casarett and Doull’s Toxicology the Basic Science ofPoisons discusses target organs:

Most chemicals that produce systemic toxicity donot cause a similar degree of toxicity in allorgans but usually produce the major toxicity toone or two organs. These are referred to astarget organs of toxicity for that chemical.

Appendix A of the HCS clearly states that employeesexposed to health hazards must be apprised of bothchanges in body functions and the signs and symptomsthat may occur to signal the changes. A labelincorporating a rating system is not permitted forshipped containers unless additional label informationis affixed to the container. The specific hazardsindicated in the standard’s definitions for “physical”and “health” hazards are applicable. Phrases such as“caution”, “danger”, or “harmful if inhaled”, areprecautionary statements, not hazard warnings. Thedefinition of “hazard warning” states that the warningmust convey the hazards of the chemical and is intendedto include the target organ effects. If, when inhaled,the chemical causes lung damage, then that is theappropriate warning. Lung damage is the hazard, notinhalation.


A-20

There are some situations where the specific targetorgan effect is not known. Where this is the case, themore general warning statement would be permitted. Forexample, if the only information available is an LC50test result, “harmful if inhaled” may be appropriate.

It will not necessarily be appropriate to warn on thelabel about every hazard listed in the MSDSs. The datasheet is to address essentially everything that isknown about the chemical. The selection of hazards tobe highlighted on the label will involve someassessment of the weight of the evidence regarding eachhazard reported on the data sheet. Assessing theweight of the evidence prior to including a hazard on alabel will also necessarily mean consideration ofexposures to the chemical that will occur to workersunder normal conditions of use, or in foreseeableemergencies. However, this does not mean that onlyacute hazards are to be covered on the label, or thatwell substantiated hazards can be left off the labelbecause they appear on the data sheet.

An example of a situation where it may not be necessaryto include the presence of a hazardous ingredient in aformulation when developing the product’s labelfollows: Recently, IARC published monograph no. 44,entitled, “Alcohol Drinking.” IARC’s determination onthe carcinogenicity of ethanol is based on chronicexposure to ethanol through human consumption via thedrinking of alcoholic beverages, over time. Inperforming the hazard determination on a productmixture which contains ethanol as one of the hazardousingredients, a chemical manufacturer must, under theHCS, include mention of ethanol as a hazardousingredient on the MSDSs, along with the findings aspublished in the IARC monograph. As part of the hazarddetermination, manufacturers must consider exposures tothe chemical product that would occur under normalconditions of use or in foreseeable emergencies, andtoxicity associated with all routes of entry. If achemical manufacturer were to formulate a product whichcontained ethanol as part of the mixture, but theproduct’s intended use did not involve exposure throughingestion of the ethanol, the manufacturer coulddocument the intended use and resultant exposurescenarios on the MSDSs but not label the product as a


A-21

“carcinogen.” Again, the information about thecarcinogenicity of ethanol would need to appear on theMSDSs, but since exposure under normal conditions ofuse, etc., would not involve ingestion and since theonly evidence calling ethanol a human carcinogen comesfrom studies involving chronic alcoholic beverageingestion, the weight of the evidence would precludethe requirement to warn of carcinogenic hazards on thelabel of the product.

Exposure calculations are not permitted in determiningwhether a hazard must appear on a label. If there is apotential for exposure other than in minute, trace orvery small quantities, the hazard must be included whensubstantiated as required by the HCS. Suppliers maynot exclude hazards based on presumed levels ofexposure downstream (i.e., omitting a carcinogenichazard warning because, in the supplier’s estimate,presumed exposures will not be high enough to cause theeffect). The hazard is an intrinsic property of thechemical. Exposure determines degree of risk andshould be addressed in training programs by thedownstream employer.

The labeling requirements for shipped containersleaving the workplace apply regardless of whether theintended destination is interstate or intrastate. Ifthe shipment is to another establishment, even withinthe same company, the shipped labeling provisionsapply. Even sealed containers intended for export mustcomply with the labeling provisions if these containersleave the workplace and if downstream employees such asdock workers may be exposed to the hazardouschemical(s).

Containers must be labeled as soon as practicablebefore leaving the workplace. If the container is atank truck, rail car, or other vehicle carrying ahazardous chemical(s) not already in a labeledcontainer(s), the appropriate label or labelinformation may either be posted on the tank orvehicle, or attached to the accompanying shippingpapers or bill of lading. Employers purchasinghazardous chemicals must ensure that their employeesare aware of the label warning before potentialexposure to incoming chemicals occur. A label may not


A-22

be shipped separately, even if it is prior to shipmentof the hazardous chemical since to do so defeats theintended purpose which is to provide an immediatehazard warning. Mailing labels directly to purchaserswill bypass those employees involved in transportingthe hazardous chemical. (Note the exception in (f)(2)for solid metals. Containers of solid metals nototherwise meeting the definition of an article need tobe labeled only with the initial shipment (unless theinformation on the label changes).)

Although no explicit requirement exists regarding theupdating of labels when new information becomesavailable, the warning would no longer be appropriateif the MSDSs contained new hazard information thatneeded to be included on the label. Since the MSDSsmust be updated within three months of receipt of newinformation, the label must be, too, in order toaccurately reflect the MSDSs information. Note thatdistributors have no affirmative obligation to createthe container labeling information for hazardouschemicals which they merely send unchanged to theircustomers, but they do have the responsibility toobtain missing labels from the chemicalmanufacturer/importer. Distributors must duplicatelabel information on chemicals which they repackage.

(f)(5) An employer’s obligation to label in-plant containersand of hazardous chemicals requires that all appropriate(f)(6) hazard warnings appear on the label pursuant to

(f)(5)(ii). For example, an employer who elects tolabel only some of the health hazard warningsassociated with the chemical while omitting otherrecognized hazards, such as carcinogenicity,selectively deprives his employees of critical hazardinformation and shall be cited under (f)(5)(ii). However, if the downstream employer has relied in goodfaith on the adequacy of the label as prepared by thechemical manufacturer and the label contains aninadequate hazard warning(s), the CSHO shall follow thereferral procedures outlined in K.7.a.(7) of thisinstruction.

For purposes of reviewing alternative in-plant labelingmethods under (f)(6), the CSHO shall note that thisprovision allows alternative means of identification


A-23

only in the event that an employer chooses to foregolabeling an in-plant container under (f)(5). Thus, anemployer may not claim that it supplemented its partialcompliance with (f)(5)(ii); i.e., labeling only some ofthe chemical’s health hazard warnings, with one of thealternative means of identification enumerated in(f)(6). The key to evaluating the effectiveness of anyalternative labeling method is to determine whether itprovides an immediate visual warning of the chemicalhazards of the workplace, identifies the applicablechemical and container, and conveys the appropriatehazard warnings. The alternative labeling system mustalso be readily accessible to all employees in theirwork area throughout each workshift. For purposes ofthis provision, the term “other such written materials”does not include material safety data sheets used inlieu of labels.

Carcinogen Labeling.

As specified in the rule, chemicals which have beenindicated as positive or suspect carcinogens by either OSHA,the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) orthe National Toxicology Program (NTP) will be considered tobe carcinogenic for purposes of the HCS.

Those chemicals identified as being “known to becarcinogenic” and those substances that may “reasonably beanticipated to be carcinogenic” by NTP must have carcinogenwarnings on the label and information on the MSDSs. ForNTP, appearing on the annual listing constitutes a positivefinding of suspect or confirmed carcinogenicity.

OSHA’s comprehensive substance specific regulations inSubpart Z of 1910 contain provisions for labeling. Therefore, containers of hazardous chemicals labeled inaccordance with the substance specific standard will bedeemed to be in compliance with the health effects labelingrequirements of the standard. An exception to this isOSHA’s Formaldehyde Standard, for which an administrativestay of the hazard communication provisions (sections(m)(l)(I) and (m)(l)(ii)) is in effect. The HCS isenforceable for these provisions of the formaldehydestandard.


A-24

It should be noted that in many instances the labelingrequirements of the comprehensive substance specificstandard address only carcinogenicity and do not addressacute health hazards or physical hazards. Those chemicalsregulated by OSHA as carcinogens in substance specificstandards that include labeling requirements are listedbelow:

Asbestos4-NitrobyphenylAlpha-NapthylamineMethyl Chloromethyl Ether3,3' Dichlorobenzidine (and its salts)Bis-Chloromethyl EtherBeta-NaphthylamineBenzidine4-AminodiphenylEthyleneimineBeta-Propiolactone2-Acetylaminofluorene4-DimethylaminoazobenzeneN-NitrosodimethylamineVinyl Chloride (and Polyvinyl Chloride)Inorganic Arsenic1,2 Dibromo-3-ChloropropaneAcrylonitrileEthylene OxideFormaldehydeBenzene

In addition to those chemicals for which OSHA has substance-specific standards, OSHA has set new permissible exposure limitsfor several substances based on avoidance of cancer. Thesesubstances are specified in the preamble to the Air Contaminantsrule published January 19, 1989. (See Table C15-1 on pages 2669-71 of the Federal Register notice of that date.)

IARC evaluates chemicals, manufacturing processes, andoccupational exposures as to their carcinogenic potential. TheIARC criteria for judging the adequacy of available data and forevaluating carcinogenic risk to humans were established in 1971(Volumes 1-16) and revised in 1977 (Volumes 17 and following).

The individual monographs contain evaluations on specificchemicals or processes. At the conclusion of each evaluation,IARC provides a summary evaluation for the individual chemical.


A-25

Periodically, IARC publishes Supplements in which chemicals thathave already been evaluated in previous monographs arereevaluated. In cases where a chemical has been reevaluated, themost recent IARC evaluation shall be relied upon.

IARC provides a summary in Supplement 7 of the chemicals whichhave been evaluated in Volumes 1-42. Table I of Supplement 7provides a summary evaluation of all chemicals for which humanand animal data were considered. Table I of Supplement 7 alsoprovides a summary classification of a chemical’s carcinogenicrisk:

Group 1 - The agent is carcinogenic to humans.

Group 2A - The agent is probably carcinogenic to humans.

Group 2B - The agent is possibly carcinogenic to humans.

Group 3 - The agent is not classifiable as to itscarcinogenicity to humans.

Group 4 - The agent is probably not carcinogenic tohumans.

All IARC listed chemicals in Groups 1 and 2A must includeappropriate entries on both the MSDSs and on the label. Group 2Bchemicals need be noted only on the MSDSs.

Individual monographs have been published subsequent toSupplement 7. For purposes of compliance with the MSDSs andlabeling requirements, the IARC monograph’s summary evaluationfor the chemical can generally be relied upon but it may benecessary to review the actual evaluations. In some cases, agroup of compounds may be listed in the summary as carcinogenicbut closer examination of the appropriate monograph will revealthat IARC had data to support the carcinogenicity of only certaincompounds. Those compound are the only ones covered by the HCS. IARC also evaluates specific industrial processes or occupationsfor evidence of increased carcinogenicity. Findings that anoccupation is at increased risk of carcinogenicity, withoutidentification of specific causative agents, do not affect labelor MSDSs requirements.

In addition, the existence of one valid, positive studyindicating carcinogenic potential in either animals or humans issufficient basis for a notation on the MSDSs. Further, if such


A-26

studies include positive human evidence, then the label mustcontain carcinogen hazard warnings.

Table 1, below, represents a general guide regarding the labelingand MSDSs requirements under the HCS. The existence of positivehuman evidence on carcinogenicity always requires carcinogenwarnings on the label. In addition, there may be instances wherea carcinogen warning may be required for a chemical that is notlisted by IARC or NTP but multiple animal studies indicatecarcinogenicity. Such cases shall be reviewed by the RegionalAdministrator and coordinated by the Directors of Compliance andHealth Standards Programs.


A-27

TABLE 1

GUIDANCE FOR MSDS AND LABEL NOTATIONSFOR CARCINOGENS

Source MSDS Label

Regulated by OSHA as X Xa carcinogen

Listed on NTP X XCarcinogen Report

IARC --Group 1 X XIARC--Group 2A X XIARC--Group 2B X Not RequiredIARC--Group 3 Not Required Not RequiredIARC--Group 4 Not Required Not Required

One Positive Study- X Not RequiredAnimal Only

Multiple Animal X Depends onStudies weight of

evidence; N.O.review needed.

One Positive Study- X XSome Human Evidence

Given the above criteria, benzene, which is regulated by OSHA asa carcinogen and for which several valid, positive human studiesexist, would require both MSDSs and label notations whereas asubstance for which only some animal data exist does not. Polyvinyl resin must be labeled as a carcinogen but final moldedand extruded products do not need to be (as per 29 CFR1910.1017). (See also the discussion on IARC’s determination onthe carcinogenicity of “Alcohol Drinking,” IARC Monograph No. 44,as it pertains to labeling requirements (page A-15).)

Material Safety Data Sheets.

(g)(1) Chemical manufacturers/importers who choose to purchasedata sheets for their products from informationservices, rather than developing them themselves,retain responsibility for providing the sheets and for


A-28

assuring their accuracy. Employers who in good faithchoose to rely upon the sheets provided to them by thechemical manufacturer/importer assume no responsibilityfor their contents.

The MSDSs requirements apply to free samples providedby chemical manufacturers and importers since thehazards remain the same regardless of the cost to theemployer.

Even though solid metals are covered differently underthe labeling requirements, the full MSDSs requirementsstill pertain.

Chemical manufacturers often receive requests for MSDSsfrom customers for chemicals or article which are notcovered under the HCS. The HCS does not require MSDSsto be provided under those circumstances. If thechemical manufacturer/importer chooses to provide theMSDSs as a customer service, it may be noted on thesheet that the chemical or article has been found bythe company not to be covered by the rule. Forexample:

This product is not considered to be or to containhazardous chemicals based on evaluations made byour company under the OSHA Hazard CommunicationStandard, 29 CFR 1910.1200.

The MSDSs may not indicate that OSHA has made such afinding for the product since the Agency does not makesuch case-by-case hazard determinations.

The safety and health precautions on the MSDSs must beconsistent with the hazards of the chemicals. SomeMSDSs include recommendations for protective measuresthat are for “worst case scenarios,” e.g., recommendingsupplied air suits for products of relatively lowtoxicity. The HCS requires that accurate informationbe provided on the MSDSs. This applies as much to“overwarning” on the MSDSs/label as well as the absenceof information (“underwarning”).

Scrap dealers are generally considered distributorsand, since their products are not articles, would NOTbe exempt from the HCS. If their suppliers are


A-29

furnishing articles which they did not manufacture,(such as a broken refrigerator), the supplier is notrequired to provide a label or MSDSs. However, iftheir suppliers added hazardous chemicals to thearticle, as would be the case if an employer scrapspipes that contained a hazardous chemical and continuesto contain its residue, the supplier must provide alabel and MSDSs to the scrap dealer. In addition,“article” manufacturers that sell for scrap thoseproduced items that fail specification or supplier whoprovide, for example, metal tailings from amanufacturing process, are considered by OSHA to havethe required knowledge of the item’s constituents andmust develop and transmit MSDSs and labels todownstream scrap dealers.

(g)(2) The OSHA Form 20 has been obsolete since May 1986. Simply following the titles of the blocks to completethe Form 20 will not result in an appropriate sheet,but it could be modified to comply. Any format isacceptable, as long as the required information isincluded. OSHA has published a sample MSDS=, formnumber OSHA-174. This is an optional form which may beused to comply with the HCS.

The requirement that the MSDSs be in English isintended to prevent importers of chemicals fromtransmitting MSDSs written in a foreign language. However, this requirement was not intended to preventthe translation into foreign languages to aid employeeunderstanding.

If a hazardous chemical is present in the mixture inreportable quantities (i.e., 0.1 percent forcarcinogens, and 1 percent for other health hazards),it must be reported unless the mixture has been testedas a whole or unless the material is bound in such away that employees cannot be exposed. If there reallyis no exposure (and the standard defines exposure asincluding potential as well as measurable exposure byany route of entry), either under normal conditions ofuse or in a foreseeable emergency, then the chemical isnot covered by the standard. (See paragraph (b)(2).)In the case of mixtures that are liquid, this provisionhas to be considered very carefully. For example, ifsilica I£ present in a wet mixture it is possible that,


A-30

if the mixture dries upon application, there is apotential for the silica to become airborne, and thus apotential for exposure. The presence of silica must beindicated on the MSDSs for the liquid mixture in thissituation.

For mixtures, if the employer is assuming the mixturehas the same hazards as its hazardous components (i.e.,no test data on the mixture as a whole), the cat. sheets for the components will satisfy the requirementsof the standard for a data sheet for the mixture. These MSDSs must be physically attached to one anotherand identified in a manner where they can be cross-referenced with the label. This approach is acceptableprovided the MSDSs includes the PEL, TLV, and otherexposure limits for each ingredient that has beendetermined to be a health hazard.

Information must also be included on the MSDSs foringredients of a mixture present in concentrations ofless than 1% (or 0.1% for carcinogens) when thehazardous substance may be released in a concentrationwhich exceeds a PEL or TLV or may present a health riskto exposed employees. An example of the latter may beTDI because it is a sensitizer in very smallconcentrations, thereby presenting a health risk thatmust be noted on the MSDSs.

A statement that the chemical is not a carcinogen isnot required nor must the MSDSs format include a spacefor such a statement. However, if the format usedprovides a space for a carcinogen entry, one must bemade since no blank spaces may be present on the MSDSs.

The MSDSs must include a telephone number for emergencyinformation. There is no requirement that theresponsible party staff a telephone line with personnelwho can respond to an emergency 24 hours a day. Thehours of emergency line operation are determined by thechemical manufacturer and should be set afterconsidering the thoroughness of the MSDSs, the hazardsof the chemicals, the frequency of use and immediacy ofinformation needs, and the availability of informationthrough alternative sources. One effective alternativeused by some suppliers is to have a telephone answeringmachine that is on when the facility is closed. The


A-31

message refers callers to the appropriate official inthe event of an emergency.

(g)(3) The standard requires that all blocks on a form becompleted. Because the standard is performance-oriented, however, employers are free to develop MSDSsin any format they wish (as long as it contains therequired information). Computer-generated MSDSs do nothave to include fields which do not apply to thechemicals for which it is being used.

(g)(4) Where the evidence can support the fact that a class orfamily of chemicals presents similar health hazards, itwould be appropriate to report those findings on theMSDSs with respect to the entire class or family. Thus, a “generic” MSDSs may address a group of complexmixtures, such as crude oil or natural gas, which havesimilar hazards and characteristics because theirchemical ingredients are essentially the same eventhough the specific composition varies in each mixture.

(g)(5) Paragraph (g)(5) requires new or significantinformation to be added to the MSDSs within threemonths. The Air Contaminants Rule, 29 CFR 1910.1000,was promulgated January 19, 1989, and set new PELs for164 substances not previously regulated by OSHA andlowered the PELs for 212 substances. These new PELsmust appear on the MSDSs. The “old” PELs, referred toas the “transitional limits,” air contaminant limitswhich must be met via the use of engineering controls,may also appear on the MSDSs, but as “new orsignificant” information regarding the hazard of achemical, the new PELs must now be included on theMSDSs.

Citations for incomplete or inaccurate MSDSs/labelsshall include an abatement requirement for thetransmittal of corrected MSDSs/labels to all customerswith the next shipment of the chemical.

(g)(6) This paragraph contains the obligation for an employerto obtain the MSDSs as soon as possible if it was notprovided with the shipment. It is not necessary forthe employer to perform a hazard determination but onlyto request the MSDSs. If the container label indicatesa hazard, the employer will know an MSDSs is necessary.


A-32

(g)(6) Chemical manufacturers and importers have anand affirmative duty to provide MSDSs to distributors and(g)(7) employers. Thus, a chemical manufacturer and/or

importer shall be cited under (g)(6) if they withholdsending MSDSs to downstream users with an initialshipment or with the first shipment after updating anMSDSs, pending a separate payment for the MSDSs,. Similarly, under (g)(7), distributors have anaffirmative duty to provide MSDS. to otherdistributors and downstream employers and cannotwithhold sending the MSDSs pending separate payment.

(g)(7) See Definitions (c), in this Appendix, for a discussionof commercial account. Employers purchasing hazardouschemicals from a retail distributor, whose employeeswill be required to use those chemicals with a greaterfrequency and duration of exposure than that of regularconsumers, must request the MSDS(s) from the retaildistributor in order to provide his employeesprotection under the HCS.

(g)(8) This provision requires MSDSs or electronicallyaccessible MSDSs to be maintained on site. Readablecopy of MSDS(s) must be available on-site. This may beaccomplished by the use of computers with printers,microfiche machines, and/or telefax machines, any ofwhich would meet the intent of the standard. The keyto compliance with this provision is that employeeshave no barriers to access to the information and thatthe MSDSs be available during the workshift. Whendirect and immediate access to paper or hard-copy MSDSsdoes not exist, CSHOs should evaluate the performanceof the employer’s system by requesting a specificMSDSs. Mere provision of the requested informationorally via telephone is not acceptable.

CSHOs must exercise judgment in enforcing thisprovision. Factors that may be appropriate to considerwhen determining if MSDSs are readily accessible mayinclude: Must employees ask a supervisor or othermanagement representative for the MSDSs? Are the sheetsor alternative methods maintained at a location andunder conditions where employees can refer to themduring each workshift, when they are in their workareas? If a computer or FAX system is used, doemployees know how to operate and obtain information


A-33

from the system? Employees must have access to theMSDSs and be able to get the information when they needit, in order for an employer to be in compliance withthe rule.

On multi-employer jobsites, employers who produce, useor store hazardous chemicals in such a way that otheremployers’ employees are exposed must also providecopies of or access to MSDSs as discussed in section(e) of this Appendix. Again, actual paper copies ofdata sheets, computer terminal access, FAX, or othermeans of providing readable copy on-site are permitted,as long as no barriers to employee access exist.

(g)(9) If employees work at more than one site during theshift, they must be able to immediately obtain theMSDSs information in an emergency. While the MSDSs maybe maintained at a central location in the primaryworkplace facility, a representative of the employermust be available at that central location to respondto requests for emergency information via telephone orother means.

(g)(10) Computerized data sheets are permitted as long as theyare readily accessible to employees (i.e., employeeshave been trained and know how to operate the computersor otherwise access the MSDSs files) Many larger firmsuse terminals in plant and train key employees toaccess them. This is acceptable, as long as theinformation can be obtained during any work shift, asrequired by the HCS. Similarly, the use of telefaxmachines to obtain MSDSs is acceptable as long as thesystem is reliable and readily accessible whileemployees are in their work areas during all workshifts.

Employee Information and Training.

(h) Employees are to be trained at the time they areassigned to work with a hazardous chemical. The intentof this provision is to have information prior toexposure to prevent the occurrence of adverse healtheffects. This purpose cannot be met if training isdelayed until a later date.


A-34

Additional training is to be done whenever a new hazardis introduced into the work area, not a new chemical. For example, if a new solvent is brought into theworkplace, end it has hazards similar to existingchemicals for which training has already beenconducted, then no new training is required. Ofcourse, the substance-specific data sheet must beavailable, and the product must be properly labeled. If the newly introduced solvent is a suspectcarcinogen, and there has never been a carcinogenichazard in the workplace before, then new training forcarcinogen hazards must be conducted in the work areaswhere employees will be exposed to it.

Complete retraining of an employee does notautomatically have to be conducted when an employerhires a new employee, if the employee has receivedprior training by a past employer, an employee union,or any other entity. It is highly unlikely that noadditional training will be needed since employees willneed to know the specifics of their new employers’programs such as where the MSDSs are located anddetails of the employer’s in-plant labeling system, ifappropriate.

If it is determined that an employee has not receivedtraining or is not adequately trained, the currentemployer will be held responsible regardless of whoprovided the training to the employee. An employer,therefore, has a responsibility to evaluate anemployee’s level of knowledge with regard to thetraining and information requirements of the standard,and the employer’s own hazard communication program,including previous training the employee may havereceived. The training requirements also apply if theemployer becomes aware via the multi-employer worksiteprovision of exposure of his employees to hazards forwhich they have not been previously trained.

Training need not be conducted on each specificchemical found in the workplace, but may be conductedby categories of hazard (e.g., carcinogens,sensitizers, acutely toxic agents) that are or may beencountered by an employee during the course of hisduties. This approach to training may be especiallyuseful when training employees about the types of


A-35

hazards they may encounter at another employer’sworksite.

A frequently overlooked portion of the trainingprovisions is that dealing with emergency procedures. If the chemical is very hazardous, more informationwould be expected to be provided on the MSDSs and,therefore, the training for emergency procedures,including information about the characteristics of thechemical and precautions to be taken would need to bemore extensive. Section 1910.1200(h) requires trainingof employees on (among other things) the measuresemployees can take to protect themselves from hazardsincluding emergency procedures and an explanation ofthe information on the MSDSs. Section (g)(2)(viii) ofthe HCS requires the MSDSs to address safe handling anduse of chemicals which includes cleanup of spills andleaks. Section (g)(2)(x) requires the MSDSs to addressemergency and first aid procedures.

Questions have arisen regarding the interface of1910.120 training requirements for emergency proceduresand those for the HCS. The scope and extent oftraining regarding emergency procedures willnecessarily be dependent upon the desired response ofemployees to an emergency. If the employer intends tomerely evacuate the work area, the training inemergency procedures would be quite simple and limitedbut should include information on the emergency alarmsystem in use at the worksite and evacuation routes andareas where applicable. However, if the employees areexpected to take appropriate action to moderate orcontrol the impact of the emergency in a similarfashion as emergency responders would, then additionaltraining will be required. At a minimum, trainingthese responders on the “emergency procedures” requiredunder section (h) should include, as applicable, leakand spill cleanup procedures, appropriate PPE,decontamination procedures, shut-down procedures,recognizing and reporting unusual circumstances(incidents), and where to go (evacuate to) in anemergency.

Giving an employee a data sheet to read does notsatisfy the intent of the standard with regard totraining. The training is to be a forum for explaining


A-36

to employees not only the hazards of the chemicals intheir work area, but also how to use the informationgenerated in the hazard communication program. Thiscan be accomplished in many ways (audiovisuals,classroom instruction, interactive video), and shouldinclude an opportunity for employees to ask questionsto ensure that they understand the informationpresented to them.

Furthermore, the training must be comprehensible. Ifthe employees must receive job instructions in alanguage other than English, then training andinformation will probably also need to be conducted ina foreign language.

Trade Secrets.

(I)(2) The designation of an incident as a “medical emergency”is left to the discretion of the treating physician ornurse.


B-1

Appendix B

Sample Letter MSDS/Label Query

Dear (Name or Position of Responsible Employer Representative):

Representatives of the Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration (OSHA)/or State plan designated agency recentlyvisited/or corresponded with (company name), which purchases thefollowing chemical(s) from your company:

(List chemicals, products)

OPTION 1: At the time of the visit, (company name) did nothave Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)/labels forthese products despite their prior request for it.

OPTION 2: At the time of the visit, Material Safety DataSheets (MSDS)/labels supplied by your company werefound to be deficient. (Describe the specificdeficiencies.)

You are required under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (29CFR 1910.1200) or your State’s right-to-know law to performhazard determinations, label containers, and provide the MSDS forall hazardous chemicals which you produce or import. A copy ofthe standard is provided for your reference. Please immediatelysend properly completed material safety data sheets/labels forthe chemicals listed above to your customer and a copy to me. Ifthis information is not received within 30 days, an inspection ofyour establishment may be conducted.

If the MSDS/label described above was deficient, you are alsorequired to send revised copies to all of your customers with thefirst shipment after a MSDS/label is revised.

Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questionsregarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at (inserttelephone number).

Sincerely,

Area Director


C-1

Appendix C

Hazard Evaluation Procedures

The hazard evaluation procedures required by the standard areperformance-oriented. Basically, OSHA’s concern is that theinformation on labels and data sheets, and in the trainingprogram, is adequate and accurate. Although specific proceduresto follow and number of sources to be consulted cannot beestablished, general guidance can be provided. The hazardevaluation process can be characterized as a “tiered” approach--the extent to which a chemical must be evaluated depends to alarge degree upon the common knowledge regarding the chemical,whether its health effects are under review, and how prevalent itis in the workplace.

1. The first step for CSHO’s evaluating chemicals is todetermine whether the chemical is part of the “floor” ofchemicals to be considered hazardous in all situations.

a. The floor of chemicals consists of three sources. Theyare as follows:

(1) Any substance for which OSHA has a permissibleexposure limit (PEL) in 1910.1000, or acomprehensive substance-specific standard inSubpart Z. This includes any compound of suchsubstances where OSHA would sample to determinecompliance with the PEL.

(2) Any substance for which the American Conference ofGovernmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has aThreshold Limit Value (TLV) in the latest editionof their annual list is to be included in theHazard Communication Program. Any mixture orcombination of these substances would also beincluded.

(3) Any substance which the National ToxicologyProgram (NTP) or the International Agency forResearch on Cancer (IARC) has found to be asuspect or confirmed carcinogen or which OSHAregulates as a carcinogen is to be included in theHazard Communication Program.


C-2

b. Sources to generally establish hazards of the chemicalsthat are part of the floor of hazardous chemicalscovered by the standard:

The OSHA Chemical Information Manual, OSHAInstruction CPL 2-2.43, October 20, 1987.

NIOSH/OSHA Occupational Health Guidelines.

Documentation for the Threshold Limit Values.

NTP Summary of the Annual Report on Carcinogens.

IARC Monographs.

In addition, the CSHO should check the NIOSH Registryof Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances (RTECS) to seeif any hazards are indicated which do not appear inthese sources. If there are, further study should bedone to evaluate the hazards. RTECS should never beconsidered a definitive source for establishing ahazard since it consists of data that has not beenevaluated. It is, however, a useful screeningresource.

2. The second step is to consult other generally availablesources to see what has been published regarding thechemical. Patty’s Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology wouldbe one such source. OCIS contains a number of otherchemical information sources. Material Safety Data Sheetsavailable through information services would also be useful.

3. The third step, for those chemicals where information is notreadily available or where such available information is notcomplete, is to perform searches of bibliographic databases. In general, the National Library of Medicine (NLM)services should be used. These include the Toxicology DataBank (TDB), TOXLINE, and MEDLARS. The information generatedby these data bases should be evaluated using the criteriain Appendix B of the HCS; i.e., to qualify as an acceptablestudy, it must be conducted according to scientificprinciples (e.g., in animal studies, number of subjects isadequate to do statistical analyses of the results; controlgroup is used, and the study must show statisticallysignificant results indicating an adverse health effect). This evaluation obviously requires a subjective,


C-3

professional assessment. Any questions should be referredto the Directorate of Compliance Programs, Office of HealthCompliance Assistance (through the Regional Office) forassistance. In general, uncorroborated case reports and invitro studies, such as Ames tests, are useful pieces ofinformation, but not definitive findings of hazards. Animalstudies involving species other than those indicated in theacute hazard definitions must be evaluated as well. Theacute hazard definitions are not included in the standard to“categorize” chemicals but rather to establish thatchemicals meeting those definitions fall under the coverageof the standard.

4. In some cases, the only information available on a substancemay be employer-generated data. If the employer indicatesthat such information is the basis for the hazardevaluation, the CSHO shall ask to see it to complete theOSHA evaluation.

5. In cases where the employer denies the CSHO access to itsown hazard data and no published data on the chemical can befound to review the sufficiency of the hazard determination,the Regional Office shall be contacted for assistance inobtaining an administrative subpoena. The Directorate ofCompliance Programs shall be contacted if assistance isrequired in order to obtain unpublished chemical hazardinformation available from other Federal agencies such asEnvironmental Protection Agency.

6. If an employer has found any chemical to be nonhazardous,and the CSHO has reason to believe it is hazardous, furtherinvestigation is required. The definitions of hazard in thestandard are very broad, and it is not expected that manychemicals can be considered nonhazardous under thisapproach. Those most likely to be exempted would bechemicals that pose no physical hazards, and which havelethal dose findings above the limits found in the acutehazard definitions.

7. In some cases, the employer may not have addressed in theHazard Communication Program a specific chemical that theCSHO knows to be present through knowledge of the process orthrough sampling or other investigation of the workplace. This situation should also be further investigated. If theCSHO has information to indicate that there is a hazard, theemployer must be able to defend the finding of no hazard.


D-1

Appendix D

Guide for Reviewing MSDS Completeness

NOTE: This guide has been developed for use as an optionalaid during inspections.

During CSHO review for Material Safety Data Sheet completeness,the following questions may be helpful:

1. Do chemical manufacturers and importers have an MSDS foreach hazardous chemical produced or imported into the UnitedStates?

2. Do employers have an MSDS for each hazardous chemical used?

3. Is each MSDS in at least English?

4. Does each MSDS contain at least the:

(a) Identity used on the label?

(b) Chemical and common name(s) for single substancehazardous chemicals?

(c) For mixtures tested as a whole:

(1) Chemical and common name(s) of the ingredientswhich contribute to the known hazards?

(2) Common name(s) of the mixture itself?

(d) For mixtures not tested as a whole:

(1) Chemical and common name(s) of all ingredientswhich are health hazards (1 percent concentrationor greater), including carcinogens (0.1 percentconcentration or greater)?

(2) Chemical and common name(s) of all ingredientswhich are health hazards and present a risk toemployees, even though they are present in themixture in concentrations of less than percent or0.1 percent for carcinogens?


D-2

(e) Chemical and common name(s) of all ingredients whichhave been determined to present a physical hazard whenpresent in the mixture?

(f) Physical and chemical characteristics of the hazardouschemical (vapor pressure, flash point, etc.)?

(g) Physical hazards of the hazardous chemical includingthe potential for fire, explosion, and reactivity?

(h) Health hazards of the hazardous chemical (includingsigns and symptoms and medical conditions aggravated)?

(I) Primary routes of entry?

(j) OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL)? The AmericanConference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists(ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV)? Other exposurelimit(s) (including ceiling and other short termlimits)?

(k) Information on carcinogen listings (reference OSHAregulated carcinogens, those indicated in the NationalToxicology Program (NTP) Annual Report on Carcinogensand/or those listed by the International Agency forResearch on Carcinogens (IARC))?

NOTE: Negative conclusions regardingcarcinogenicity, or the fact that there is noinformation, do not have to be reportedunless there is a specific space or blank forcarcinogenicity on the form.

(l) Generally applicable procedures and precautions forsafe handling and use of the chemical (hygienicpractices, maintenance and spill procedures)?

(m) Generally applicable control measures (engineeringcontrols, work practices and personal protectiveequipment)?

(n) Pertinent emergency and first aid procedures?

(o) Date that the MSDS was prepared or the date of the lastchange?


D-3

(p) Name, address and telephone number of the responsibleparty?

5. Are all sections of the MSDS completed?

osha instruction cpl 2-2.38c oct 22 1990 office of health ... · osha instruction cpl 2-2.38c oct...

Documents