Under 1952.29(a), when did OSHA give initial approval to the Massachusetts State Plan for State and local Government employees?
The Massachusetts State Plan received initial approval on August 18, 2022. See 1952.29(a) for the approval notice.
OSHA 1952.29
Massachusetts State Plan approval
1952 Subpart B
Questions & Answers
Under 1952.29(b), what specific staffing assurances did Massachusetts provide for enforcement and consultation?
The State assured it would provide a fully trained, adequate staff including 8 safety and 3 health compliance officers for enforcement inspections, and 2 safety and 1 health consultants to perform consultation services. See 1952.29(b) for the staffing numbers and assurances.
Under 1952.29(b), what is the timeline for Massachusetts to have the fully trained staff in place?
Massachusetts must have the fully trained, adequate staff within three years of the plan approval (i.e., by August 18, 2025). See 1952.29(b) which sets the three-year timeframe for staffing commitments.
Under 1952.29(b), did Massachusetts assure OSHA it would provide adequate funding to support the State Plan?
Yes — the State gave satisfactory assurance of adequate funding to support the Plan. See 1952.29(b) for the assurance about funding.
Under 1952.29(c), which employers and employees are covered by the Massachusetts State Plan?
The plan covers only State and local government employers and employees in Massachusetts. See 1952.29(c) for the statement of coverage.
Under 1952.29(c), are private-sector employers in Massachusetts covered by this State Plan?
No — the Massachusetts State Plan applies only to State and local government employers and employees; private-sector employers remain under Federal OSHA jurisdiction. See 1952.29(c) and the general 1952 context for scope.
Under 1952.29, where can I find more details about the Massachusetts State Plan and its scope?
You can find more details in the plan notice and links referenced in the approval; see 1952.29(c) which directs readers to additional plan information and resources.
Under 1952.29(b) and 1956.10, what does the State have to assure about its enforcement personnel?
The State must assure that it will continue to provide a sufficient number of adequately trained and qualified personnel necessary for enforcement of standards. See 1952.29(b) for the State's assurance and 1956.10 for the regulatory requirement regarding adequate enforcement staffing.
Under 1952.29(b), what minimum number of enforcement compliance officers and consultation consultants did the State promise?
The State promised at least 8 safety and 3 health compliance officers for enforcement inspections, and 2 safety and 1 health consultants for public-sector consultation services. See 1952.29(b) for these minimums.
Under 1952.29, does the State Plan approval cover both safety and health programs?
Yes — the Plan's staffing assurances include both safety and health personnel for enforcement and consultation, indicating the Plan covers both safety and health programs. See 1952.29(b).
Under 1952.29(b), does the State have to maintain enforcement activity while the staffing commitments are being implemented?
Yes — the State has assured it will continue to provide a sufficient number of adequately trained personnel necessary for enforcement as required by 1956.10, so enforcement activity must be maintained consistent with those assurances. See 1952.29(b).
Under 1952.29, where is the official Federal Register citation for the Massachusetts State Plan approval?
The Federal Register citation for the approval is 87 FR 50776, dated August 18, 2022. See 1952.29 which includes the FR citation.
Under the OSHA Letter of Interpretation "Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater" (2007-07-30), does the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard (29 CFR 1910.1030) generally apply to wastewater treatment employees?
Generally no — OSHA does not typically consider diluted raw sewage or wastewater (not originating from a health care facility or bulk blood source) to be "other potentially infectious materials" under the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard. See the interpretation Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater for the detailed explanation of when 29 CFR 1910.1030 applies.
Under the 2007 Letter of Interpretation on bloodborne pathogens, should employers of wastewater workers automatically stop offering hepatitis B vaccination?
No — employers must evaluate job tasks to determine if occupational exposure to blood or other potentially infectious materials (OPIM) is reasonably anticipated before changing vaccination practices. See Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater which explains the employer's responsibility to assess exposure and applicability of hepatitis B vaccination under 29 CFR 1910.1030.
Under the 2007 Letter of Interpretation, do employees who render first aid in wastewater facilities fall under the Bloodborne Pathogens Standard?
Yes — employees who render first aid (including as a collateral duty) are considered to have occupational exposure and the provisions on hepatitis B vaccination can apply. See Bloodborne pathogens in wastewater for examples and guidance on first aid providers and vaccination responsibilities.
Under the 2004 Letter of Interpretation "Spray booth standards inquiry" (2004-08-12), does a small-capacity power-ventilated structure used occasionally meet the definition of a spray booth?
Yes — based on the scenario provided, that type of structure meets OSHA's definition of a spray booth. See Spray booth standards inquiry for OSHA's evaluation and reasoning.
Under the 2004 spray booth interpretation, are spray booths required to have automatic sprinklers as part of their fire protection?
Yes — if a structure meets the definition of a spray booth, it is required to be equipped with approved automatic sprinklers on the upstream and downstream sides of the filters. See Spray booth standards inquiry which cites the sprinkler requirement.
Under the 2004 spray booth interpretation, can a dry chemical or carbon dioxide system be used instead of water sprinklers?
Yes — OSHA confirmed that a dry chemical extinguishing system or a carbon dioxide system may be used in place of an automatic sprinkler system if they meet OSHA requirements. See Spray booth standards inquiry for the discussion of equivalent protection options.
Under the 2004 spray booth interpretation, which OSHA standard applies to storage of flammable paints for a spray booth scenario?
The storage of flammable materials must meet the flammable and combustible liquids requirements in 29 CFR 1910.106 (inside storage room provisions such as size, ventilation, and fire protection). See Spray booth standards inquiry which directs readers to 1910.106 for paint storage room requirements.