By Jessica Domel
Multimedia Reporter

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is moving forward with its proposed national heat standard for both indoor and outdoor workers, including those on farms and ranches.

“We are very early in the process,” John Walt Boatright, director of Government Affairs for the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), said. “OSHA submitted, a couple of years ago, an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking, which asks some questions of stakeholders about current practices and what they’re currently doing to protect workers against heat and heat illness. They have taken all of those responses and that feedback, and they have taken really the past many months to try to dissect and evaluate those comments as they are considering how they may move forward with a proposed regulation.”

In late April, an OSHA working group presented their recommendations on the heat standard.

The recommendations include requiring employers to designate a heat safety coordinator who would be responsible for monitoring and implementing the heat plan at work sites.

“There would be a provision requiring employee input in the development and updating of the HIIP (Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Plan),” Steve Schayer, OSHA director of Physical Hazards, said. “Then, (there would be) a requirement for review and evaluation of the HIIP at some periodic interval, which we’re thinking partly annually or when there’s a heat-related incident at the workplace.”

Under the proposal, employers would be required to monitor heat in one of two ways—either by monitoring the local heat index forecast or taking measurements on site.

Employers would be able to use the heat index or a wet bulb globe temperature to determine when specific temperature triggers are met.

A wet globe temperature takes into account ambient temperature, humidity, wind speed and radiant heat sources like the sun.

When the heat index reaches the first proposed trigger of 80 degrees, the advisory group recommended requiring employers to provide drinking water to employees.

“This would require employers to provide access to drinking water that’s placed in locations that are readily accessible to the employee that’s suitably cool in temperature and of sufficient quantity. For example, one quart per employee per hour,” Schayer said.

The proposal would require employers to provide break areas.

“For outdoor work sites, the break area should accommodate the number of employees on break, also be readily accessible to the work area and have shade or air conditioning,” Schayer said.

Indoor workplaces would need an indoor break area large enough to accommodate all employees on break, be readily accessible and be air-conditioned or have increased air movement, and, if appropriate, de-humidification.

A required place for employees to acclimatize is also under consideration.

“We’re currently considering two options for new and returning on acclimatized employees,” Schayer said. “One would incorporate the high heat trigger requirements during the first week or work while the employee is acclimatizing. The other would be a gradual acclimatization schedule where employees increase their exposure to heat each day.”

The second heat trigger, 90 degrees Fahrenheit, would require employers to take additional steps, including rest breaks.

“We’re considering requiring a minimum of 15 minutes of rest for every two hours of work. However, if there’s an unpaid meal break, that could serve as one of the rest breaks,” Schayer said. “For example, if there’s an eight-hour shift and the temperature is above the high heat trigger for the entire shift, then there would be, in theory, one 15-minute rest break in the morning and then, the unpaid lunch break, and then one 15-minute rest break in the afternoon to allow employees to cool down and recover.”

The proposal would require additional observation and supervision on days when the mercury tops 90 degrees.

“This would be observing for signs and symptoms of heat-related illness amongst employees,” Schayer said. “Some options we’re currently considering are specifying a buddy system where employees would pair up with each other or by a supervisor or a heat coordinator that’s on site.”

Employers may be required to connect with lone workers frequently.

“Under the high heat trigger, we are considering a requirement for a hazard alert, which is really just to remind employees when the high heat trigger is exceeded or is expected to be exceeded that these additional provisions are in place along with some other reminders of things that employees should remember when working in high heat,” Schayer said.

OSHA is considering a requirement for a heat illness and response plan that would specify the steps an employer should be taken if an employee is experiencing signs and symptoms of a heat-related illness.

An emergency response plan with specific details of how to respond in a heat emergency and requirements for training and record keeping are also being considered.

“The training requirement would be for initial and annual refresher training for supervisors, heat safety coordinators and employees,” Schayer said.

The working group’s presentation in late April is only step two in OSHA’s rulemaking process.

The next step would be publishing a proposed rule and accepting public comment on it.

There could be a public hearing, if requested, and then OSHA would use public comments to develop and publish a final rule.

Although many farmers and ranchers already take action to protect themselves and their employees, U.S. agriculture could be directly impacted by the rule. It depends on how the rule is crafted and implemented.

“That’s why we are paying very close attention to it,” Boatright said. “That’s why we have, at several stages of the process, had certain grassroots members, both farmer members but also state Farm Bureau staff, weigh in to ensure that we’re able to have a voice as they’re considering their regulation.”

Boatright noted the recommendations from the working group provide insight into OSHA’s direction, but a final rule may not be limited to those specific items.

“We really won’t know until the draft regulation or the proposed rule is placed in the Federal Register sometime within the next few months,” Boatright said. “That’s when we’ll really be able to sink our teeth into what they are actually formally proposing, and we’ll certainly have to consult with our members and our policy to determine how we respond.”

The rule, depending on how it is crafted, could add significant disruption to some businesses.

“If you think about a small family farm in Washington state growing apples or cherries, that is going to be a dramatically different type of operation with different conditions than a cattle operation in Florida,” Boatright said. “Our main message to OSHA has been, if you are going to go down this route, you must account for the diverse needs of American agriculture across the board. I think they’re recognizing and realizing how complicated and challenging that is.”

That’s one reason Boatright said it’s important for farmers and ranchers to weigh in during the public comment period after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register.

He also emphasized that American farmers and ranchers really care about and value their employees, so many already take action to protect their workers from heat-related illnesses.

“The success of the farm worker and the farm employee is the success of the family farm,” Boatright said. “It’s important to note moving forward that there’s already an incredible amount of work being done in the field at the farm level to ensure farm workers are being taken care of and have the resources they need to be successful.”