Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents
• Standard Number: 1910.1001; 1910.1001(j)(8)(ii)(B); 1926.1101; 1926.1101(k)(5)(ii)(B)



June 8, 2010

Joshua S. Koch, R.S.
Environmental Abatement Section
Ohio Department of Health
246 North High Street
Columbus, OH 43215

Dear Mr. Koch:

Thank you for your February 12, 2010, letter to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Directorate of Enforcement Programs (DEP). Your letter has been referred to DEP's Office of Health Enforcement for an answer to your specific questions regarding the reportable accuracy of analytical results of bulk asbestos samples under OSHA's Asbestos standards. This reply letter constitutes OSHA's interpretation only of the requirements discussed and may not be applicable to any question not detailed within your original correspondence. Your paraphrased questions and our replies are below.

Question 1: Does OSHA agree with and accept the determination by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of rounding laboratory-reported percentages of bulk asbestos analyses by point-counting to the nearest whole-number percent? (Reference: EPA Letter of Interpretation to Michael Zlatic, January 1, 2007, Control No. A070006)

Reply 1: OSHA does not agree that this referenced EPA letter of interpretation applies in all situations. However, OSHA still accepts laboratory