Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents Standard Interpretations - (Archived) Table of Contents
• Standard Number: 1910.120(q)(11)(ii)
• Status: Archived

Archive Notice - OSHA Archive

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.

February 5, 1990

Dale T. Drysdale, CIH
Corporate Industrial Hygienist
Vulcan Materials Company
Post Office Box 7497
Birminghan, Alabama 35253-0497

Dear Mr. Drysdale:

This is in response to your request for an interpretation of OSHA's Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response standard (29 CFR 1910.120) as it applies to the following scenario at a manufacturing site which is not a hazardous waste site.

The scenario you gave is as follows:

Stored in tanks at the manufacturing site are large quantities of gasoline, acids, corrosives, and other potentially hazardous substances. During the weekend or middle of the night, when no employees are present, one of the substance leaks from its tank and seeps onto the ground, contaminating the soil on plant property.

When the employees arrive for the next scheduled work shift, the tank is empty and the contamination discovered. The employer determines that the on-site employees have met all training requirements specified in paragraph (q)(11)(ii), including "other appropriate safety and health training made necessary by the tasks that they are expected to be [sic] performed such as personal protective equipment and decontamination procedures."

In addition, the employer calls in his employees from another location to assist in the cleanup. These employees have received training that is identical to that provided to on-site employees.

Your letter does not provide sufficient facts upon which to render a determinative answer to your question of whether your interpretation that "only paragraph (q)(11)(ii), applies is correct. First, it is not clear whether the actions taken by the employees fall within the definition of post emergency response. Second, even if the employees' actions fall within the definition of post emergency response, when such actions are performed by employees involved in the initial emergency response it "is considered to be part of the initial response" and the employees are not subject to paragraph (q)(11). See 29 CFR 1910.120(a)(3) for definitions. Third, as stated in the standard and explained in the preamble, the training requirements of 29 CFR 1910.120(q) do not cover employees engaged in operations specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(iv). See 29 CFR 1910.120(q) and the Preamble, 54 Fed. Reg. 9294, March 6, 1989. However, the standard includes other training requirements in addition to those in 29 CFR 1910.120(q). See 29 CFR 1910.120(e) and 29 CFR 1910.120(p)(7).

Thus, assuming that your manufacturing site is subject to the training requirements of 29 CFR 1910.120(q), then 29 CFR 1910.120(q)(11)(ii) would apply only if the employees' actions fall within the definition of post emergency response, and are taken after "completion of the emergency response," and by employees other than those involved in the initial emergency response.

I hope that this information about the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard is helpful.

Sincerely,

Thomas J. Shepich, Director
Directorate of Compliance Programs




Mr. Thomas Shepick
Director of Health Compliance
OSHA
Room N 3463
U.S. Department of Labor
Washington, D.C. 20210

Re: Request for Interpretation: Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response; Final Rule, 29 CFR 1910.120; 54 FR 9293-9336, March 6, 1989.

Dear Mr. Shepick:

I am writing to request an official interpretation of the captioned standard as it applies to the following scenario at a manufacturing site which is not a hazardous waste site.

Scenario:

Stored in tanks at the manufacturing site are large quantities of gasoline, acids, corrosives, and other potentially hazardous substances. During the weekend or middle of the night, when no employees are present, one of the substance leaks from its tank and seeps onto the ground, contaminating the soil on plant property.

When the employees arrive for the next scheduled work shift, the tank is empty and the contamination discovered. The employer determines that the on-site employees have met all training requirements specified in paragraph (q)(11)(ii), including "other appropriate safety and health training made necessary by the tasks that they are expected to be [sic] performed such as personal protective equipment and decontamination procedures."

In addition, the employer calls in his employees from another location to assist in the cleanup. These employees have received training that is identical to that provided to on-site employees.

None of the employees have met all requirements specified in other parts of the standard (paragraphs (b) through (o)). The employer removes the contaminated soil using both on-site and off-site employees.

Interpretation:

The employer is subject to and in compliance with 29 CFR 1910.120, but only paragraph (q)(11)(ii); no other portions of 1910.120 apply under these circumstances.

Please advise me if my interpretation is correct.

Sincerely,

Dale T. Drysdale, CIH
Corporate Industrial Hygienist


Archive Notice - OSHA Archive

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.


Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents Standard Interpretations - (Archived) Table of Contents