Respiratory Protection across the state plans

“In addition to the requirements set out in 29 C.F.R. 1910.134(i)(5), as amended, the employer shall either: (1) station a competent employee outside of the work area to monitor and attend the compressor and other equipment that supplies breathing air … or (2) employ a compressed air system that includes alarms for compressor failure and overheating…”

Where the federal standard tells an employer to prevent a hazardous breathing-air supply, Alaska names the two ways to do it. Either a trained employee stands outside the work area attending the compressor (trained on that particular supplied-air system, and able to demonstrate a correct response to a malfunction) or the system carries alarms for compressor failure and overheating plus a carbon monoxide alarm, in-line adsorbents and filters delivering Grade D air, and alarms audible remotely or up to 300 feet. Everything is checked before use. There is no third option on a supplied-air job in Alaska.

Respiratory protection is adopted federal text at the July 14, 2020 cut-off, which puts the September 2019 fit-testing appendix comfortably inside it. Arizona keeps one subpart on its own separate clock: R20-5-602.02 adopts Subpart U, the COVID-19 healthcare emergency temporary standard, and pins it to text published no later than June 21, 2021, applying only to covered employers as defined in 1910.502. It is a reminder that Arizona's adoption is not uniformly dated: most of Part 1910 sits at July 14, 2020, one subpart does not.

“Where the current AQI for PM2.5 is equal to or greater than 151, but does not exceed 500, the employer shall provide a sufficient number of respirators to all employees for voluntary use in accordance with section 5144 and encourage employees to use respirators.”

Section 5144 restates the federal respiratory protection duties in California's numbering. What has no federal counterpart is the rule sitting next to it: §5141.1 makes respirators an outdoor-air-quality obligation. Once the current AQI for PM2.5 reaches 151 and wildfire smoke is reasonably anticipated, employers must supply NIOSH-approved respirators such as N95s for voluntary use and encourage their use; above an AQI of 500 respirator use becomes mandatory under §5144, with an assigned protection factor high enough to bring the air inside the facepiece below 151. Training for the voluntary tier uses Appendix B to §5141.1 rather than Appendix D to §5144. For outdoor construction in California this converts a respiratory program from a chemical-exposure question into a seasonal one.

Respiratory protection is incorporated at the July 1, 2017 edition of Part 1910. What changes the program underneath it is that Hawaii runs its own permissible exposure limits: Exhibits A and B replace the federal 1910.1000(b) tables, so the exposure assessment that decides whether a respirator is needed, and which assigned protection factor will do, is measured against state values. Hawaii's chapter also carries state-specific definitions added to 1910.2, including ANSI Z88.2-1984 on practices for respiratory protection, which is named in the rule itself.

“The commissioner of labor hereby incorporates by reference Sections 1904.0 through 1904.46 of 29 CFR 1904 (recording and reporting occupational injuries and illnesses) as it existed on January 1, 2006.”

Respiratory protection itself is federal text in Indiana. The recording side is not current federal text: injury and illness recording runs on 29 CFR 1904 as it stood on January 1, 2006, with one carve-out worth knowing. The Indiana Act is read in place of the federal Act everywhere except in 1904.40(b)(1)(ii) and (iii), where the federal meaning is kept. A respirator-related illness case therefore gets recorded under a twenty-year-old version of the recording rules.

“An employer shall provide for acclimatization of exposed employees for a period of up to 14 days: (1) When an employee is newly exposed to heat in the workplace; and (2) When an employee returns to work after 7 or more consecutive days of absence from the workplace.”

Maryland adopts the federal respiratory protection standard, so the program, medical evaluation and fit-testing duties are the familiar ones. The Maryland-only requirement that lands hardest on respirator users is the acclimatization rule in the heat chapter: up to fourteen days for a new hire, and again after seven consecutive days away, with a written schedule that increases exposure by no more than twenty percent a day. Respirator work raises heat strain, and the acclimatization schedule has to account for it: the chapter requires monitoring during that period by phone, radio or a buddy system.

“First responder operations plus level. First responders at operations plus level are individuals who respond to hydrocarbon fuel tank leaks where the leaking tanks contain a hydrocarbon fuel which is used to propel the vehicle on which the tank is located.”

Respiratory protection itself is incorporated federal text in North Carolina. What the state added sits next to it: a sixth emergency-response training level in 1910.120(q)(6) for hydrocarbon fuel tank leaks on highway, industrial, agricultural and construction vehicles. Responders at that level need training at least equal to first responder operations level plus demonstrated competency in the added areas, and the employer must certify it. It is a level that exists nowhere in the federal standard, and it changes who may approach a leaking fuel tank and in what protection.

“Measures that an employer must take to monitor air quality and reduce the exposure of an employee to poor air quality from wildfire smoke where: (1) The air quality index is 150 or more but less than 200; and (2) The air quality index is 200 or more; and … An air quality index level caused by wildfire smoke at which an employer shall not allow an employee to perform critical tasks outdoors.”

Nevada requires its Administrator to set wildfire-smoke rules at two air quality tiers and to fix a level at which outdoor critical tasks stop altogether, a hard ceiling federal law does not have. Every employer must also run a communications system that tells employees, in a way they understand, when they are being exposed at an index of 150 or more during their shift and what protective controls are available, and that lets an employee report conditions back. For outdoor construction in Nevada that turns respiratory protection into a seasonal, air-quality-driven obligation rather than only a chemical-exposure one.

“prior to the assembly of the entire firefighting team, a qualified incident commander may allow two or more employees to enter the IDLH atmosphere with one employee located outside the IDLH atmosphere until the arrival of additional employees”

South Carolina's general industry subarticle is identical to Part 1910 except for seven listed modifications, and one of them changes the two-in/two-out rule. Where federal 1910.134(g)(4) requires at least two employees outside an IDLH atmosphere, South Carolina lets a qualified incident commander proceed with one, on five conditions: the commander has completed the Incident Command System course certified by the South Carolina Fire Academy, the entrants have completed the Basic Firefighter Course or equivalent, the standard staffing pattern is not feasible, the commander has judged the entry safe with the personnel on site, and additional employees are imminent. It is a narrow, conditioned relaxation, and the certifications are named.

“In lieu of the current federal occupational safety and health standards codified in Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910 … or the absence thereof because of repeal or revocation, the Commissioner … adopts the standards limiting exposure to air contaminants as contained in subparagraph (b) of this rule.”

This is the rule that changes what a Tennessee respiratory program has to achieve. The exposure limits Tennessee enforces are compiled from OSHA's 1989 Air Contaminants rule at 54 Federal Register 2920–2983 and its listed corrections, the limits a federal court vacated, which is why the rule speaks of "the absence thereof because of repeal or revocation". Federal OSHA reverted to the older Table Z values; Tennessee did not. So for a range of substances the permissible exposure limit here is lower than the federal one, which changes the exposure assessment that drives respirator selection and the assigned protection factor you need.

“All requirements of the process safety management (PSM) standard 29 CFR 1910.119 are hereby extended to include blister agents sulfur mustard (H, HD, HT), nitrogen mustard (HN-1, HN-2, HN-3), Lewisite (L) and halogenated oximes (CX) and the nerve agents tabun (GA), sarin (GB), soman (GD) and VX.”

Respiratory protection is incorporated federal text at the July 1, 2018 edition. Utah's own addition in this territory is one no other state carries: process safety management extended by name to chemical warfare agents, the blister agents and nerve agents listed above. It is a legacy of the chemical demilitarisation work in the state, and it means a respiratory program covering those substances sits inside a PSM framework here rather than only inside 1910.134.

Vermont maintains its own permissible exposure limits. The table is titled Table Z-1-A and it carries two sets of columns (transitional limits and final rule limits, with TWA, STEL and ceiling values) the structure of OSHA's 1989 air contaminants rule rather than the current federal Table Z. It is kept current in its own right: the published version is the one updated for silica and beryllium. Because exposure assessment is what decides whether a respirator is needed and which assigned protection factor will serve, the state table is the number a Vermont respiratory program has to work from.

“You may accept a fit test completed by a previous employer IF: 1. You obtain written documentation of the fit test; 2. The results of the fit test are not more than twelve months old; 3. The employee will use the same respirator (the same type, model, style, and size)…”

Chapter 296-842 replaces 1910.134 in Washington. The core duties track the federal ones (written program, medical evaluation, annual fit testing, training) but 296-842-15005 adds a portability provision the federal standard does not have: a fit test done by a previous employer may be accepted on four conditions, including written documentation and the identical respirator model and size. On construction sites where crews move between contractors within a season, that is the difference between re-testing a new hire and reading their paperwork.

Respiratory protection sits inside Subpart I, so in Wyoming it comes in through Chapter 9 at the 2016 edition as it stood on June 19, 2018, which is before the September 26, 2019 amendment that added the two modified ambient aerosol CNC fit-testing protocols to Appendix A. The exposure limits that drive respirator selection, by contrast, come from Chapter 26 at the 2024 edition as in effect September 12, 2025. Two chapters, seven years apart, on the same respirator program.