Which chemicals in a veterinary practice fall under hazard communication?

The Hazard Communication Standard is the OSHA requirement veterinary practices are cited under most often, and its boundaries are less intuitive than they appear. In 1993, prompted by a congressional inquiry, OSHA set out which substances in a veterinary practice the standard reaches, the three circumstances in which drugs fall outside it, and how FDA and EPA labeling interact with the agency's own requirements.

Background

On April 14, 1993, Congressman Glenn Poshard wrote to OSHA on behalf of a constituent, Mr. S.G. Walton, who had raised concerns about the application of the Hazard Communication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200, to hazardous substances found in veterinary practices. The inquiry enclosed a list of hazardous substances compiled by the American Veterinary Medical Association. Roger A. Clark, Director of OSHA's Directorate of Compliance Programs, responded on May 11, 1993.

The purpose OSHA attributes to the standard

The agency framed the requirement in terms of what the information enables rather than the paperwork it produces:

OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) provides workers exposed to hazardous chemicals with information as well as training about the identities and hazards of those chemicals, as well as appropriate protective measures. OSHA believes that when workers have such information, they are better able to take steps to protect themselves from experiencing adverse effects from exposure.

It then identified the uses it expects employers to make of that information: "Employers may use the information, for example, to select personal protective equipment, design engineering controls, and substitute less hazardous chemicals."

What the standard covers

OSHA answered the constituent's question about coverage narrowly:

In response to your constituent's concern about which chemicals are covered by the HCS, the HCS applies only to hazardous drugs and chemicals. The criteria for hazard determination are specified in the HCS.

The evaluation duty sits upstream of the practice. Quoting subsection (d)(1), OSHA noted that "Chemical manufacturers and importers shall evaluate chemicals produced in their workplaces or imported by them to determine if they are hazardous. Employers are not required to evaluate chemicals unless they choose not to rely on the evaluation performed by the chemical manufacturer or importer for the chemical to satisfy this requirement." Where that evaluation identifies a hazard, the information "must be made available to their customers by means of appropriate labels and material safety data sheets (MSDS)."

Three exemptions for drugs

The letter enumerates the circumstances in which the standard does not reach a drug:

Three situations exist where the HCS does not apply to drugs. First, the HCS does not apply to drugs which are packaged for sale to consumers in a retail establishment. Second, it does not apply to drugs intended for personal consumption by employees while in the workplace. And finally, when a drug is in solid final form for direct administration to the patient (i.e. tablets or pills). If however, the solid pill or tablet is pulverized or crushed to facilitate administration then it is covered by the HCS.

The third exemption is conditional, and the condition is one that routine veterinary practice regularly defeats. A tablet dispensed intact is exempt. The same tablet crushed to facilitate administration is covered.

FDA and EPA labeling

OSHA confirmed that it defers to other agencies on labeling to avoid duplication:

Mr. Walton was correct in his comment on labeling by FDA and EPA. To eliminate duplication in labeling requirements between agencies, OSHA accepts the labeling requirements of both the FDA and EPA for drugs and pesticides, respectively.

This deference is confined to labeling. OSHA's separate 1993 interpretation on veterinary drugs addresses the point directly and states that the FDA exemption "does not exempt the other requirements of the standard such as providing Material Safety Data Sheets."

A note on terminology

This letter predates OSHA's 2012 alignment of the standard with the Globally Harmonized System and refers to Material Safety Data Sheets throughout. The current term is Safety Data Sheet, and the format is now standardized to sixteen sections. Quoted language is reproduced as OSHA wrote it.

What this means for your practice

1. Hazard, not category, determines coverage. The standard reaches hazardous chemicals and hazardous drugs. Inventories built around product type rather than hazard classification will misallocate effort in both directions.
2. You are entitled to rely on the manufacturer's evaluation. OSHA places the hazard determination on manufacturers and importers. A practice need not perform its own analysis unless it elects to.
3. The solid final form exemption is narrower than it sounds. Crushing or pulverizing to facilitate administration brings the product back within the standard, and this is ordinary practice in veterinary medicine.
4. Accepted FDA and EPA labeling does not reduce your data sheet obligations. The deference OSHA describes is limited to labels.
5. The AVMA list is a starting point, not a compliance inventory. The list enclosed with this inquiry identifies substances commonly present in practices. Whether each is covered still turns on the hazard determination the standard specifies.

This interpretation dates from 1993 and predates the 2012 GHS revision. Interpretation letters explain existing requirements and do not create new obligations, and OSHA revises its guidance as new information becomes available. Consult the original, and the current text of 1910.1200, before relying on it.