Agency safety official designation

Under 1960.6(a) the head of each agency must designate a Designated Agency Safety and Health Official (DASHO) with sufficient authority and responsibility to represent and support the agency head in managing the agency's occupational safety and health program.

• The DASHO should be of the rank of Assistant Secretary or have an equivalent rank or degree of responsibility.
• The DASHO must have sufficient headquarters staff with the training and experience necessary to carry out the responsibilities in Part 1960.

(See the requirement in 1960.6(a).)

Under 1960.6(a) the DASHO must have sufficient headquarters staff who possess the necessary training and experience, and those staff should report directly to, or have appropriate access to, the DASHO.

• "Sufficient" means enough trained staff to carry out the agency's safety and health responsibilities across its mission and locations.
• Direct reporting or clear access ensures the DASHO can implement policies, coordinate programs, and allocate resources effectively.

(See 1960.6(a).)

Under 1960.6(b)(1) the DASHO must assist the agency head in establishing an agency occupational safety and health policy and program that implements section 19 of the OSH Act, Executive Order 12196, and Part 1960.

• This means a written policy and program that set expectations, assign responsibilities, and describe how the agency will meet federal employee safety requirements.

(See 1960.6(b)(1).)

Under 1960.6(b)(2) the DASHO shall help establish an organization that includes designation of safety and health officials at appropriate levels and provides adequate budgets and staffs to implement the program at all operational levels.

• Key elements include clear lines of authority, assigned safety officers or coordinators at headquarters and field levels, and budget/scoping for staffing, equipment, and training.

(Refer to 1960.6(b)(2).)

Under 1960.6(b)(3) the DASHO must assist in creating a set of procedures that ensures effective implementation of the agency's safety and health policy and program, tailored to the agency's mission, size, and organization.

• Practical procedures include inspection schedules, incident investigation steps, hazard correction timelines, training protocols, and communications pathways.
• Procedures should be written, assigned to responsible parties, and periodically reviewed for effectiveness.

(See 1960.6(b)(3).)

Under 1960.6(b)(4) the DASHO must assist the agency head in establishing clear goals and objectives aimed at reducing and eliminating occupational accidents, injuries, and illnesses.

• Goals should be measurable (e.g., reduce recordable injury rate by X% within Y years) and linked to specific programs and timelines.
• Objectives can include training completion rates, inspection frequency, hazard abatement targets, and corrective action closure times.

(See 1960.6(b)(4).)

Under 1960.6(b)(5) the DASHO must help establish plans and procedures that evaluate program effectiveness at all operational levels.

• Typical evaluation tools include audits, periodic program reviews, performance metrics (injury/illness rates, near-miss reports), management reviews, and follow-up on corrective actions.
• Evaluations should identify trends, gaps, and opportunities for improvement and feed into goal setting and resource decisions.

(See 1960.6(b)(5).)

Under 1960.6(b)(6) the DASHO must help the agency head establish priorities focused on the factors that cause occupational accidents, injuries, and illnesses so appropriate corrective actions can be taken.

• Priorities should be set using risk-based criteria (severity, likelihood, number of employees exposed), trend analysis, legal obligations, and mission criticality.
• Use a hazard ranking or risk matrix to allocate resources to the highest-risk conditions first.

(See 1960.6(b)(6).)

Under 1960.6(c) the agency head must assure that safety and health officials are designated at each appropriate level with sufficient authority and responsibility to plan for and assure funds for necessary staff, equipment, materials, and training.

• This means officials must be empowered to request and secure budget resources and to make programmatic decisions to implement effective safety measures.
• It also requires assigning responsibility for planning and ensuring resources are available where needed.

(See 1960.6(c).)

Yes, an agency can apply an alternate standard under the Part 1960 process, but it must request the Secretary of Labor's approval before implementing it, following the procedures in 1960.

• The Hexavalent chromium sampling methods letter (2019) explains that 29 CFR 1960.17 allows agencies to apply alternate standards where necessary, but the agency must submit the required information for approval prior to implementation.

(See 1960 and the interpretation in Hexavalent chromium sampling methods.)

For federal agencies OSHA does not issue citations under Section 5(a)(1) of the OSH Act; instead, OSHA refers to the federal agency equivalent regulation such as 29 CFR Part 1960 (for example, 1960), as explained in the Adoption of ANSI window cleaning standard letter (2005).

• That letter clarifies OSHA's practice of citing the federal agency equivalent (e.g., 1960.8) when addressing safety obligations of federal agencies.

(See 1960 and the 2005 interpretation.)

Under Part 1960 and OSHA interpretation, military personnel and operations that are uniquely military are excluded from OSHA coverage, but civilian employees working on non-unique equipment or under contractor operations are covered and must be protected consistent with OSHA rules and Part 1960.

• The Oxygen-deficient atmospheres in HVAC letter (2024) explains that Executive Order 12196 and Part 1960 exclude uniquely military personnel and equipment from OSHA jurisdiction, but civilian employees in comparable workplaces remain covered by OSHA standards.
• Agencies should apply Part 1960 obligations, including designation of safety officials, to those covered workplaces.

(See 1960 and the 2024 interpretation.)

Failure to formally designate a DASHO does not remove the agency's obligations under Part 1960; the agency head remains responsible for establishing and managing the occupational safety and health program and assuring compliance with Part 1960 requirements.

• The regulation places the duty on the agency head to ensure the functions in 1960.6(b) and (c) are carried out, so the agency must still provide policy, organization, procedures, goals, evaluations, and priorities.
• Practically, the agency should promptly designate an official or delegate responsibilities in writing to meet Part 1960 obligations and document authorities and reporting lines.

(See 1960.6(a) and 1960.6(c).)

Under 1960.6(a) the DASHO is recommended to be of Assistant Secretary rank or equivalent so they have sufficient authority and visibility to represent the agency head, influence policy and resource decisions, and obtain necessary access across the organization.

• Higher rank supports the DASHO's ability to secure budgets, staff, and corrective actions and to coordinate across program offices.

(See 1960.6(a).)

Under 1960.6(c) safety officials must have sufficient authority to plan for and assure funds for necessary safety and health staff, equipment, materials, and training so the agency can implement an effective program.

• "Assure funds" means officials can identify needs, justify budget requests, and follow through to obtain resources or escalate to decision-makers when funding is required.

(See 1960.6(c).)

Under 1960.6(b)(3) procedures should be specific enough to ensure consistent and effective implementation across the agency while being adapted to the agency's mission, size, and organizational complexities.

• For small offices, that may mean concise checklists and a single point of contact; for large agencies, it may require tiered procedures, delegated authorities, and standardized templates for inspections and corrective actions.

(See 1960.6(b)(3).)

Yes, under 1960.6(b)(4) agencies should establish measurable goals and objectives—such as reducing injury/illness rates or increasing completion of safety training—to drive reductions in workplace accidents, injuries, and illnesses.

• Use realistic, time-bound targets and track them with clear metrics (e.g., TRIR, lost-time cases, training completion percentages).

(See 1960.6(b)(4).)

Under 1960.6(b)(5) acceptable evaluation methods include program audits, regular workplace inspections, review of injury/illness data, management reviews, employee surveys, and follow-up on corrective actions.

• The evaluation plan should cover all operational levels and result in documented findings and corrective actions tied to timelines and responsible officials.

(See 1960.6(b)(5).)

Under 1960.6(b)(6) priorities should be set based on the factors that cause accidents, injuries, and illnesses so corrective actions address root causes and are implemented where they will have the most impact.

• Use root cause analysis, risk ranking (severity × probability), and incident trend data to select corrective actions, then assign responsibilities and timelines for abatement.

(See 1960.6(b)(6).)