General Duty Clause


WASHINGTON - A proposed rule to align the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) with provisions of the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) will be published in the September 30 Federal Register.

The current HCS requires chemical manufacturers and importers to evaluate the hazards of the chemicals they produce or import and provide information to subsequent users. The current standard requires all employers to have a hazard communication program for workers exposed to hazardous chemicals. The program includes materials such as container labels, safety data sheets, and employee training.  A number of countries, including the United States, international organizations and stakeholders participated in developing the GHS to address inconsistencies in hazard classification and communications. The GHS was developed to provide a single, harmonized system to classify chemicals, labels and safety data sheets with the primary benefit of increasing the quality and consistency of information provided to workers, employers and chemical users. Under the GHS, labels would include signal words, pictograms, and hazard and precautionary statements. Additionally, information on safety data sheets would be presented in a designated order.

The proposal to align the hazard communication standard with the GHS will improve the consistency and effectiveness of hazard communications and reduce chemical-related injuries, illnesses and fatalities,” said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. “Following the GHS approach will increase workplace safety, facilitate international trade in chemicals, and generate cost savings from production efficiencies for firms that manufacture and use hazardous chemicals.”

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to promote safe and healthful working conditions for America’s men and women by setting and enforcing standards and providing training, outreach, and education. For more information, visit www.osha.gov.

OSHA Steps Up Enforcement of Worker Training Requirements

OSHA will step up enforcement of worker training requirements, especially for non-English speaking workers, according to a recent announcement from Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis. She announced a number of major new OSHA enforcement initiatives during her April 14 speech at the National Action Summit for Latino Worker Health and Safety. OSHA currently requires that training provisions under OSHA standards be provided in a language or a form workers can understand. OSHA has already developed a training language policy. OSHA further requires that its compliance officers check and verify that workers have received the training required by OSHA standards. The Agency will expand upon this and effective on April 28—Workers Memorial Day—Secretary Solis explained, “OSHA will also assure that its Compliance Officers check and verify not only that the training has been provided, but that it was provided in a format that the workers being trained can understand.”

Trainers need to find ways to hurdle language barriers. While English is a second language for an increasing percentage of the workforce, employers are still obligated to make sure Hispanic worker training and other immigrant worker training is understood by employees. It’s not enough to make a presentation if you know that members of your audience may not be able to comprehend or use the information effectively. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Department of Labor (DOL), and other government agencies are keenly aware of this.

Following are some commonsense tips for Spanish worker training:

  • Establish companywide safety policies for bilingual training supported by top management.
  • Hire supervisors who are bilingual.
  • Provide signage (safety guidelines, emergency evacuation, warnings) in Spanish and include diagrams or symbols.
  • Pair new employees with bilingual veteran employees who comply with safety and health guidelines.
  • Conduct periodic jobsite visits and work with employees in the field.
  • Follow up formal training with demonstrations, then have employees demonstrate to one another.
  • Conduct safety meetings and toolbox talks to reinforce formal training

OSHA’s Training Language Policy

According to OSHA’s training standards policy statement, if an employee does not speak or comprehend English, instruction must be provided by the employer in a language the employee can understand. Similarly, if the employee’s vocabulary is limited, the training must account for that limitation. According to OSHA, an employer’s responsibility to provide employees with safety information and training doesn’t go away because an employee can’t understand standard English-language training programs. When that is the case, employers must inform and train these workers in a language they can understand.

The policy directs OSHA compliance inspectors to determine whether workplace instructions regarding job duties are given in a language other than English. If so, they will also need to provide safety and health training to employees in the same manner. If a reasonable person would conclude that the employer had not conveyed the training to its employees in a manner they were capable of understanding, the violation may be cited by the inspector as serious.

PEL and REL are acronyms used by the safety industry to define Permissible Exposure Limits (OSHA term) and Recommended Exposure Limits (NIOSH term).

In 1974, NIOSH joined OSHA in developing a series of occupational health standards for substances with existing PELs. OSHA sets enforceable permissible exposure limits (PELs) to protect workers against the health effects of exposure to hazardous substances. PELs are regulatory limits on the amount or concentration of a substance in the air. They may also contain a skin designation. OSHA PELs are based on an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) exposure. Together NIOSH and OSHA set limits for 380 hazardous chemicals.

OSHA currently has about 500 permissible exposure limits (29 CFR part1910.1000), while NIOSH has about 700 RELs. NIOSH is able to evaluate them while OSHA PEL limits has not be updated since late 1960’s.

Acting under the authority of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 USC Chapter 15) and the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (30 USC Chapter 22), NIOSH develops and periodically revises recommended exposure limits (RELs) for hazardous substances or conditions in the workplace. NIOSH also recommends appropriate preventive measures to reduce or eliminate the adverse health and safety effects of these hazards.

The NIOSH Web site features many different types of databases and information collections. The most popular databases include the International Chemical Safety Cards, NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards, and NIOSHTIC-2.

Chemical Databases:

· Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH)
Provides the immediately dangerous to life or health air concentration values (IDLHs) for substances and the criteria and information sources that have been used to determine these values.

· International Chemical Safety Cards (WHO/IPCS/ILO)
ICSC cards summarize essential health and safety information on chemicals for their use at the “shop floor” level by workers and employers in factories, agriculture, construction and other work places.

· Manual of Analytical Methods (NMAM)
NMAM is a collection of methods for sampling and analysis of contaminants in workplace air, and in the blood and urine of workers who are occupationally exposed.

· NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards (NPG)
The NPG is intended as a source of general industrial hygiene information on several hundred chemicals/classes for workers, employers, and occupational health professionals.

·  The Emergency Response Safety and Health Database (ERSH-DB)
Developed by NIOSH for the emergency response community, The ERSH-DB contains accurate and concise information on high-priority chemical, biological and radiological agents that could be encountered by personnel responding to a terrorist event.

·Occupational Safety and Health Guidelines for Chemical Hazards
Summarizes information on permissible exposure limits, chemical and physical properties, and health hazards. It provides recommendations for medical surveillance, respiratory protection, and personal protection and sanitation practices for specific chemicals that have Federal occupational safety and health regulations.

· OSHA 1988 Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs)
PELs are OSHA comments from the January 19, 1989 Final Rule on Air Contaminants Project extracted from 54FR2332 et. seq. This rule was remanded by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the limits are not currently in force.

·Specific Medical Test Published in the Literature for OSHA Regulated Substances (MEDTEST)
The MEDTEST database lists the specific medical tests published in the literature for OSHA regulated substances. Updates of OSHA mandated tests (July 1, 2000) and NIOSH/OSHA recommendations are included.

OSHA recently solidified leadership for the agency and has provided a clearer picture of the regulatory horizon.

First of all, David Michaels, PhD, MPH, assumed his position as head of OSHA when the Senate confirmed his nomination as assistant secretary of Labor for occupational safety and health. Nominated by President Barack Obama on June 28, the Senate acted on the nomination December 3.

Michaels, an epidemiologist, has been a professor at the George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services in Washington, DC, and is also the author of Doubt is Their Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens Your Health.

Agency watchers assumed that any work on new, and perhaps controversial, standards, would await the establishment of a permanent director.

While Michaels as settling in, Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis held an online Q&A session Dec. 7 to discuss regulations at the Department of Labor.

Solis announced that OSHA is considering airborne infectious disease protection for healthcare workers and will publish a request for information in the Federal Register in March.

A standard would require healthcare employers to protect workers from tuberculosis, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and influenza, such as H1N1, on which OSHA recently issued an enforcement directive.

When asked if an airborne infectious disease standard would be modeled after the California version, which took years to achieve consensus among employers, labor and other stakeholders, Solis said the California standard “would certainly be one important piece of information that OSHA will consider in deciding whether to propose or issue a standard.” She would not predict how long it would take to issue a final standard.

Also, Solis confirmed that although OSHA has conducted several inspections, it has not yet issued any citations based on the H1N1 enforcement directive.

In an OSHA-specific session later that day, HealthLeaders Media asked OSHA interim director Jordan Barab, if the absence of airborne infectious disease standard has hampered the agency with regard to its H1N1 educational preparedness and enforcement activities?

“No, it has not hampered us,” said Barab. “While a standard on airborne transmissible diseases would have been preferable, we believe that we are responding to the issues effectively using existing standards and the General Duty Clause.”

On the matter of issuing an industry-wide ergonomics standard, both Solis and Barab reiterated—word-for-word in fact—”At this time, OSHA has no plans for regulatory activity.” Both said that a proposal to reinstate the work-related musculoskeletal disorders column on the OSHA 300 Injury Log was not a prelude to issuing such a standard.

Concerning an industry-specific ergonomic standard, such as one for safe patient handling standard, Barab said,” There are many options that OSHA might consider if the agency decides to pursue rulemaking in this area. Industry specific standards is one option that would be considered.”


David LaHoda, the managing editor of Medical Environment Update and OSHA Watch, has produced healthcare training videos and consulted for medical practices and ambulatory healthcare facilities.