| The Home page of ILPI's Safety Data Sheet (SDS) Resource, the leader in SDS information since 1995! | |
| The history and philosophy behind this resource. | |
| A curated collection of books and reference materials concerning Safety Data Sheets and closely related topics. | |
| Paste your plain text SDS into the SDS-Demystifier, and it will be converted into a hypertext-enriched document with links to detailed explanations of each key term. | |
| An extensive list of frequently asked questions about Safety Data Sheets including regulations, content, compliance, and more. | |
| A humorous take on Safety Data Sheet jargon. Fill in the blanks on our entry form to generate a personalized Unsafety Data Sheet to share with your coworkers. | |
| Since 1995, we've maintained this massive curated list of the best places to find Safety Data Sheets on the Internet. | |
| Way more than a glossary, this hypertext-enhanced resource covers hundreds of SDS-related terms and expert knowledge. Each entry includes both the SDS relevance and links to additional authoritative resources. | |
| Archived results of Safety Data Sheet related polls taken by some of our millions of site visitors | |
| You are here! The OSHA regulations behind SDS regulations, including the inspection guidelines and over 400 official interpretations letters under the Hazard Communication Standard | |
| Commercial suppliers of SDS authoring and management software as well as cloud compliance services. | |
| Commercial companies that will create SDS's for your specific needs as well as SDS translation companies. |
Safety signs, banners, and scoreboards? Get yours at Safety Emporium!
OSHA Hazard Communication Letters of Interpretation
HCS on Hazard warnings required on product labels
- Issued
- Record type
- Interpretation
- Historical standard
- 1910.1200, 1987 expanded rule (PDF)
- Current standard
- HCS 2024, as amended
ILPI assessment: Hazard-versus-risk principle retained; modern classification governs labels
This letter addresses the obsolete 1987 version of the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). Its central HazCom principle remains useful: a supplier cannot omit a classified hazard solely because it predicts a low exposure at a particular customer's workplace. The old label and weight-of-evidence descriptions do not replace the current classification criteria.
Under the current HCS, apply hazard classification, the full range of evidence, mixture procedures, and shipped-container label elements and Appendix C. Distinguish a hazard from workplace risk and use the full article definition where relevant; old minute/trace wording is not a universal exemption or an alternative to hazard-specific cutoffs. See the downstream FAQ. Private ANSI guidance is supplementary, not an automatic compliance approval. The exact old CPL 2-2.38B text has not been independently verified here; the later 1998 CPL 2-2.38D is not its original. Current enforcement counterpart: current HCS inspection procedures.
Last reviewed: .
About this ILPI assessment
This comparison with current requirements is not a finding that OSHA has formally withdrawn this letter. This assessment reflects editorial judgment informed by human review and AI assistance. It is an opinion, may contain errors or omissions, and is not an official OSHA determination. For guidance on how OSHA requirements apply to your circumstances, contact your local OSHA office.
OSHA's notice about interpretation letters
The following notice is published on OSHA's interpretation pages; it is general guidance, not a letter-specific withdrawal notice.
OSHA requirements are set by statute, standards and regulations. Our interpretation letters explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations. This letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation of the requirements discussed. Note that our enforcement guidance may be affected by changes to OSHA rules. Also, from time to time we update our guidance in response to new information. To keep apprised of such developments, you can consult OSHA's website at https://www.osha.gov.
Source: OSHA's original letter page.
March 20, 1990
Charles R. Clark, PhD
Manager, Toxicology and Product Safety
Unocal Corporation [ILPI note: acquired by Chevron in 2005]
1201 West 5th Street
Post Office Box 7600
Los Angeles, California 90051
Dear Dr. Clark:
Badger Brigade cartridge-operated fire extinguishers from Safety Emporium are field serviceable for minimal downtime.
Thank you for your letter of November 15, 1989, to Ms. Jennifer Silk of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) Directorate of Health Standards. Your letter was referred to the Directorate of Compliance Programs for response, and I apologize for the delay of this letter to you. You requested a clarification of OSHA's policy on hazard warnings required on product labels as per the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS), 29 CFR 1910.1200 [ILPI: Original HCS 1987 context (PDF) · Current HCS].
In your letter you specifically ask: ".. is the consideration of exposure potential acceptable in determining whether health hazard warnings should be included on the labels?" OSHA policy on compliance with the provisions of the HCS is that exposure calculations are not permitted in determining whether a hazard must appear on a label. If there is a potential for exposure, (other than in minute, trace or very small quantities), the hazard must be included when well-substantiated. Suppliers may not exclude hazards based on presumed levels of exposure downstream (i.e., omitting a carcinogenic hazard warning because, in the supplier's estimate, presumed exposure will not be high enough to cause the effect). The hazard is an intrinsic property of the chemical. Exposure determines degree of risk and should be addressed in training programs by the downstream employer. It should be noted that the General Carbon decision confirmed OSHA's longstanding interpretation of the rule's requirements -- it does not represent a new or different position on those issues.
[ILPI note: At issuance: 1910.1200, 1987 expanded rule (PDF). Current counterparts: hazard classification, mixture rules, and shipped labels. Predicted low workplace exposure does not by itself authorize omitting a classified hazard.]
As you point out in your letter, OSHA's compliance instruction for the HCS, CPL 2-2.38B [ILPI note: Exact CPL 2-2.38B text not independently verified here; the later 1998 CPL 2-2.38D is not the original. Current enforcement counterpart: CPL 02-02-079.], states that "it will not necessarily be appropriate to warn on the label about every hazard listed in the MSDS." The weight of the evidence for each hazard reported on the MSDS is to be considered when determining if the hazard needs to be included on the label, not the predicted downstream exposure amounts. Of course, the hazardous chemical must be present in such a manner that it is available for exposure, i.e., if the hazardous chemical is an ingredient in a mixture, and the chemical is bound in such a manner that it is incapable of resulting in exposure, then information on its potential health effects would not have to be included on either the MSDS or the label.
As you may be aware, OSHA staff met with ANSI representatives during the development of the ANSI labeling guidelines. At that time, we discussed the implications of the language regarding exposure assessments, and also discussed our concerns that this approach was not consistent with the HCS. Our understanding, based on those meetings, is that the ANSI committee members believe the differences between the ANSI standard and the HCS are merely semantic in nature, and not substantive. They believe that a label properly prepared in accordance with the ANSI guidance will meet OSHA's requirements as stated herein. We appreciate their efforts in developing the ANSI labeling standard, which we believe serves as a beneficial tool to employers trying to comply with the requirements of the Hazard Communication Standard. However, employers must continue to ensure that their hazard determinations are based on the requirements of the HCS itself, using the ANSI standard or other such documents as supplementary information and guidance.
I hope this discussion helps clarify the concerns you raised. Please feel free to contact us again if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Patricia K. Clark Director Designate Directorate of Compliance Programs
The original official public domain version of this document is available from OSHA at https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/1990-03-20.