PPE General Requirements across the state plans

“all references to "Assistant Secretary," "Director," and "OSHA Area Director" are revised to read "Director of Labor Standards and Safety"; all references to "OSHA" are revised to read "Alaska Occupational Safety and Health (AKOSH)."”

The PPE standard is adopted "as amended", so Alaska carries the current federal text rather than a dated edition, including the properly-fits requirement. The adoption is selective rather than wholesale: 8 AAC 61.1010(b) names 1910.5(c) and (d), 1910.6, 1910.7, 1910.12, then the ranges 1910.19 to 1910.1018, 1910.1020, and 1910.1024 to 1910.1450. Anything outside those ranges is not an Alaska standard. And every federal officer named inside the adopted text is read as a state one, which is what makes the adopted federal language work here.

“"Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health" means the Director of the Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health of the Industrial Commission of Arizona.”

The PPE standard applies as adopted federal text at the July 14, 2020 cut-off. What Arizona rewrites is who the federal text is talking about: R20-5-606 substitutes state officers for every federal one named in the incorporated standards, putting the Industrial Commission for the agency, the Director of ADOSH for the Assistant Secretary, the Commission's legal counsel for the Office of the Solicitor, and ADOSH itself for "OSHA". Wherever an adopted PPE provision says notify or apply to OSHA, in Arizona it means the state division.

“Personal protective equipment shall be used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.”

California splits PPE the way the federal standards do (§3380 for general industry, §1514 for construction) but §1514(c) adds a duty 1910.132 does not contain in any form: the word "manufacturer" does not appear in the federal section, while California makes the manufacturer's instructions the measure of correct use. Section 1514(d) also reaches equipment the worker supplies, putting maintenance and sanitary condition on the employer either way, and §1514(f) carries the proper-fit requirement.

“The employer shall institute and maintain an effective safety and health program to identify, evaluate, and control workplace hazards.”

Hawaii puts a written safety and health program at the front of both its general industry and its construction chapters: employers with fewer than ten employees are excused from the written requirement in general industry, and the program must set out policies that recognize and protect against hazards, state a clear goal and the mechanisms for meeting it, and provide for visible top management leadership. Above that sits a hierarchy the PPE standard only implies: eliminate by design or substitution first, reduce by engineering or administrative controls, isolation or guarding next, and provide personal protective equipment when those are inadequate. In Hawaii that order is a rule, not guidance.

“The eight-hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit for beryllium is 0.2 micrograms per cubic liter, and the short-term exposure limit for beryllium is 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter over a 15-minute sampling period.”

PPE selection in Iowa runs on the adopted federal standard, but Iowa is unusual in writing an exposure limit directly into its own construction chapter rather than leaving it inside the incorporated federal text. The figures track 29 CFR 1910.1024, which sets 0.2 micrograms per cubic meter as an eight-hour TWA and 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter over fifteen minutes. The units printed in the Iowa rule differ for the TWA. The rule took effect January 15, 2025, and it is the number a contractor doing abrasive blasting or welding on beryllium-bearing alloys will be measured against when selecting respiratory protection and protective clothing.

“The commissioner hereby incorporates by reference Sections 1903.7 through 1903.22 of 29 CFR 1903 (inspections, citations, and proposed penalties) as in effect on January 1, 2006, except as otherwise set out in this rule.”

The PPE standard applies in Indiana as federal text. What Indiana pins to a date is the enforcement machinery around it: the inspection, citation and penalty provisions are frozen at the January 1, 2006 version of 29 CFR 1903. That is the rule an inspector's conduct, a citation's form and the posting requirements are measured against here, and it has not moved with the federal ones. The rule has been readopted three times (in 2006, 2012 and 2018) without changing that date.

“Shaded areas shall: … (5) Accommodate the removal and storage of personal protective equipment during periods of use.”

The PPE standard itself is federal in Maryland. What changes the calculation on a hot site is COMAR 09.12.32, a heat stress chapter with no federal counterpart, triggered at a heat index of 80 degrees Fahrenheit indoors or outdoors. It requires shade close to the work area, open on at least three sides and large enough for employees to sit normally, and sized to let them take PPE off and store it. Where outdoor shade is demonstrably infeasible, alternative cooling and control measures must give equivalent protection; the chapter names cooling vests and air-cooled or water-cooled garments among them, which turns heat management into a PPE selection question.

“An employer shall require each employee to wear personal protective equipment as prescribed by the manufacturer when required by any MIOSHA standard.”

Construction PPE in Michigan is Part 6, and R 408.40617(2) makes the manufacturer's prescription the measure of correct wear, a duty absent from 1910.132, where the word manufacturer does not appear. R 408.40617a spells out who pays, item by item, including the exceptions for non-specialty safety-toe footwear and prescription eyewear the employee may wear off the jobsite. The proper-fit requirement at R 408.40617(5)(b) was added by the amendment effective August 12, 2025, which also brought R 408.40617 into line with the federal fit rule for construction.

“Each employee exposed to or working adjacent to moving motor vehicles as part of the employee's assigned job shall be provided with and required to wear a high visibility warning vest or other high visibility garment.”

Minnesota requires high-visibility clothing far more broadly than federal law does. 1926.201 reaches flaggers; Minn. R. 5207.0100 reaches every employee working adjacent to moving motor vehicles, and it names the performance level: Class 2 under ANSI/ISEA 107-2004, or a manufacturer rating above Class 1 for garments too small to meet the Class 2 background area. Faded, torn, dirty or defaced garments must be taken out of service immediately. The exception is narrow: permanent or semipermanent barricades designed to stop or deflect traffic on impact. Head protection sits separately at Minn. R. 5205.0020.

“Snaphooks shall be a locking type designed and used to prevent disengagement of the snaphook keeper by the connected member. Locking type snaphooks have self-closing, self-locking keepers which remain closed and locked until unlocked and pressed open for connection or disconnection.”

North Carolina's one substantive addition to the construction PPE subpart is about hardware. Federal 1926.104, on safety belts, lifelines and lanyards, says nothing about keeper design; the locking-snaphook requirement lives only at 1926.502(d)(5) and applies to personal fall arrest systems. North Carolina puts it in Subpart E as well, so any lanyard or lifeline connector on a jobsite here needs a self-closing, self-locking keeper. The state's other construction PPE amendment, at .0202, only inserts a cross-reference into 1926.28(a) and leaves the duty as federally written; its general industry PPE amendment was repealed on May 15, 2008.

PPE selection in Nevada sits inside the statutory written safety program, which must include a training program and, above 25 employees, a safety committee with employee representatives. Two specific rules bear on protective equipment. NAC 618.090 adopts ANSI Z358.1-2014 for emergency eyewash and shower equipment, so the flushing fixture has a named specification rather than a performance description. And for explosives manufacturers, NAC 618.5117 requires the written safety program to include a personal protective equipment program complying with 29 CFR 1910.132, plus medical surveillance under a licensed physician where the explosive contains trinitrotoluene.

“"Nationally recognized testing laboratory" means an organization which has been evaluated and recognized by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.1 and Appendix A of that section.”

The PPE standard applies as federal text. Two South Carolina modifications shape how equipment approval is judged underneath it. First, Subparts A and B of Part 1910 do not apply here at all, with one exception: 1910.19, the special provisions for air contaminants, does. Second, the definition of a nationally recognized testing laboratory in 1910.7 is rewritten to point at 1910.1 and its Appendix A, even though Subpart A is otherwise disapplied. When a PPE approval marking is challenged, that is the definition that decides whether the listing counts.

The PPE standard itself is adopted federal text. The reason it bites differently in Tennessee is the exposure limits sitting underneath it: 0800-1-1-.07(2) keeps the 1989 air contaminant values rather than the current federal Table Z, so the hazard assessment that drives PPE selection can land on a different answer here than it would across a state line. Tennessee also does not adopt 1910.1 through 1910.4, or 1910.15 and 1910.16 on shipyard and longshoring work, and its general industry adoption is expressed as Part 1910 as of July 1, 2008 except as provided in that exceptions rule.

“Wrist watches, rings, or other jewelry shall not be worn on the job where they constitute a safety hazard.”

Utah's General Safety Orders add personal-equipment duties that 1910.132 does not carry. Hair must be confined where there is an entanglement risk. Loose gloves, sleeves, ties, lapels and cuffs may not be worn where an entanglement hazard exists, and clothing saturated with flammable liquids, corrosives, irritants, oxidisers or other toxic materials must be removed and not worn again until properly cleaned. Jewellery is out where it is a hazard. And R614-1-5.D.7 states plainly that safety latch-type hooks shall be used wherever possible, a hardware rule that reaches every lifting and tie-off connector on the job.

“Be provided with and wear during nighttime operations a safety vest or jacket with retroreflective material in orange, yellow, white, silver, strong yellow green, or a fluorescent version of these colors and shall be visible at a minimum distance of 1,000 feet.”

The general PPE duties are federal-identical in Virginia: 16VAC25-90 adopts 1910.132, most recently amended 5/15/2017. Where Virginia goes further is for anyone acting as a designated observer or ground guide for a backing vehicle: 16VAC25-97-40 sets the garment colours for day and night work, fixes a minimum nighttime visibility of 1,000 feet, and bans personal phones and headphones while signalling. It also forbids the guide from crossing close behind a vehicle that is reversing and requires constant visual contact with the driver, who must stop the moment that contact is lost.

“You must ensure that employees wear at least: • A short-sleeved shirt; • Long pants; and • Shoes that meet the requirements of WAC 296-155-212, Foot protection.”

Washington writes its own PPE rules rather than adopting 1910.132: the hazard-assessment and provision duties sit in the core rules at WAC 296-800-160, and construction work adds WAC 296-155-200. The construction section carries a minimum-clothing requirement (short-sleeved shirt, long pants, and conforming footwear) that has no equivalent anywhere in 29 CFR. It also puts the responsibility for employee-supplied PPE on the employer: if a worker brings their own, the employer must ensure it is adequate, maintained and sanitary.

“29 C.F.R. §§ 1926.95 - 1926.107 (2025) as it was in effect on January 30, 2025.”

Here Wyoming's chapter-by-chapter pinning produces a real gap between two rules a contractor uses in the same week. Construction PPE was refreshed: Chapter 5 carries 1926.95 through 1926.107 at the 2025 edition as in effect January 30, 2025, which is the text including the properly-fits amendment. General industry PPE was not: Chapter 9 still holds 1910.132 through 1910.140 at the 2016 edition as in effect June 19, 2018. Same employer, same equipment, two different vintages of the federal text depending on which part the work falls under.