Alaska State Plan Approval

Alaska received initial approval on August 10, 1973 (1952.12(a)).

• This date is the formal initial approval recorded in the Alaska State Plan entry.

Alaska received final approval on September 28, 1984 (1952.12(b)).

• Final approval means OSHA accepted Alaska's plan as meeting federal requirements for an approved State plan.

Alaska's compliance staffing benchmarks are 4 safety and 5 health compliance officers (1952.12(c)).

• These numbers were set to meet the staffing levels required for a "fully effective" enforcement program as referenced in the 1978 Court Order in AFL-CIO v. Marshall.

Benchmarks were required because the 1978 Court Order in AFL-CIO v. Marshall required each State operating an approved State plan to establish compliance staffing levels necessary for a "fully effective" enforcement program (1952.12(c)).

• The court order led OSHA and approved States to identify minimum staffing (

The Alaska State Plan covers all private-sector employers and employees and covers State and local government employers and employees within the State, with several notable exceptions (1952.12(d)).

• For specifics about the exceptions and current coverage details, see the cited subsection which directs users to Alaska's plan information.

Yes — the Alaska State Plan covers State and local government employers and employees in the State (1952.12(d)).

• Keep in mind there are several exceptions noted in the plan; consult the State Plan details for those specifics.

You can find current exceptions and additional plan details by consulting the Alaska State Plan information as referenced in the plan's summary (1952.12(d)).

• The subsection explicitly directs users to Alaska's State Plan resources for up-to-date exceptions and program details.

Part 1952 is titled "Approved State Plans for Enforcement of State Standards" and Subpart A lists approved State Plans for private-sector and State and local government employees (1952).

• The part provides the list and basic metadata for each approved State plan, including Alaska's entry at 1952.12.

The initial approval date (August 10, 1973) marks OSHA's first acceptance of Alaska's plan, and the final approval date (September 28, 1984) marks the plan's final acceptance as meeting the federal requirements (1952.12(a), 1952.12(b)).

• Initial approval often reflects preliminary acceptance; final approval reflects that any required changes or conditions were satisfied.

The phrase refers to the staffing and program capacity needed for a State plan to carry out OSHA-equivalent enforcement, which triggered establishment of compliance staffing benchmarks for each approved State plan (1952.12(c)).

• For Alaska, those benchmarks were set at 4 safety and 5 health compliance officers to meet the court-ordered requirement.

The entry lists Alaska's compliance staffing benchmarks as 4 safety and 5 health compliance officers as the benchmarks established under the court order (1952.12(c)).

• The subsection presents these figures as the benchmarks associated with Alaska's approved plan; for any current staffing status or updates, consult Alaska's State Plan resources.

Yes — 1952.12(d) tells readers to visit Alaska's State Plan information page for current exception details and additional plan information (1952.12(d)).

• That subsection is the gateway to more detailed, up-to-date program materials that the short entry does not repeat.

No — OSHA stated that routine contact with diluted raw sewage or wastewater generally is not considered covered by the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard because the standard is triggered by the presence or reasonably anticipated presence of blood or other potentially infectious materials (OPIM) (Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater).

• The letter explains that urine, feces, and other normal human waste components are not OPIM unless visibly contaminated with blood, per 29 CFR 1910.1030(b).

Yes — employers must evaluate all job classifications and tasks to determine whether employees have occupational exposure to blood or OPIM, as required by the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard and explained in the LOI (Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater).

• The LOI emphasizes employer responsibility to identify jobs that reasonably anticipate contact with blood or OPIM (see 29 CFR 1910.1030(c)(2) as discussed in the interpretation).

Yes — employees who render first aid or medical services are considered to have occupational exposure and the provisions on hepatitis B vaccination apply to them (Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater).

• The LOI notes that employees who perform first aid as a collateral duty may be covered, and employers must offer the hepatitis B vaccine per the standard and the cited enforcement protocol.

Potentially yes, but only after the employer performs a documented exposure determination showing employees are not reasonably anticipated to contact blood or OPIM; the LOI explains that the standard is triggered by anticipated exposure, not simply by the presence of wastewater (Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater).

• Employers should document the hazard assessment and retain it; for any employees who do have exposure (e.g., first aid responders or those who may encounter used hypodermic needles), the vaccination must still be offered.

Yes — the LOI confirms that if a structure meets the definition of a spray booth under 29 CFR 1910.107, it must be equipped with approved automatic sprinklers on the upstream and downstream sides of the filters (Spray booth standards inquiry).

• The LOI specifically refers to the sprinkler requirement in 29 CFR 1910.107(b)(5)(iv) as applicable when the structure qualifies as a spray booth.

Yes — the LOI states that a dry chemical extinguishing system or a carbon dioxide system may be used in place of an automatic sprinkler system if the system meets OSHA requirements (Spray booth standards inquiry).

• The LOI points to requirements in 29 CFR 1910.161 for dry chemical systems and 29 CFR 1910.162 for gaseous agent extinguishing systems as the applicable standards.

The storage of flammable materials for spray booths must meet the flammable and combustible liquids standard in 29 CFR 1910.106, and the LOI directs readers to 1910.106(d)(4) for specific inside-storage room design and construction requirements (Spray booth standards inquiry).

• This includes items such as maximum room size, ventilation, fire protection, and electrical equipment requirements for paint storage rooms.