Skip to content

Approaching: Nov 20, 2026 — HCS 2024 Deadline. Get ready →

29 CFR 1910.1026 · Minnesota · FY2025

Hexavalent Chromium in Minnesota: FY2025 OSHA citations

22 citation items under 29 CFR 1910.1026 at inspected sites in Minnesota, from 15 inspections.

From Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025, the Department of Labor's OSHA enforcement data record 22 citation items under 29 CFR 1910.1026 at inspected sites in Minnesota, in 15 inspections. Among the 113 sections of 29 CFR parts 1904, 1910 and 1926 cited in Minnesota that year (2,730 citation items in all), this one ranks 28th by items. These counts describe inspected establishments, not the whole industry.

Paragraphs of 29 CFR 1910.1026 cited in Minnesota

ParagraphItemsShare of the 22
1910.1026(l)(1)1255%
1910.1026(d)(1)941%
1910.1026(d)(2)(iv)15%
Federal text of 29 CFR 1910.1026(l)(1), as the eCFR reads on Oct 15, 2026
“(l) Communication of chromium (VI) hazards to employees—(1) Hazard communication—general—(i) Chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors and employers shall comply with all requirements of the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) (§ 1910.1200) for chromium (VI). (ii) In classifying the hazards of chromium (VI) at least the following hazards are to be addressed: Cancer, eye irritation, and skin sensitization. (iii) Employers shall include chromium (VI) in the hazard communication program established to comply with the HCS (§ 1910.1200). Employers shall ensure that each employee has access to labels on containers of chromium (VI) and to …”

The paragraph continues in the standard. Read 29 CFR 1910.1026

Federal text of 29 CFR 1910.1026(d)(1), as the eCFR reads on Oct 15, 2026
“(d) Exposure determination—(1) General. Each employer who has a workplace or work operation covered by this section shall determine the 8-hour TWA exposure for each employee exposed to chromium (VI). This determination shall be made in accordance with either paragraph (d)(2) or paragraph (d)(3) of this section.”
Federal text of 29 CFR 1910.1026(d)(2)(iv), as the eCFR reads on Oct 15, 2026
“(iv) If monitoring reveals employee exposures to be above the PEL, the employer shall perform periodic monitoring at least every three months.”

How the Minnesota citations were classified

Of the 22 citation items: 7 serious, 0 willful, 2 repeat and 13 other-than-serious (32% serious).

Who was inspected in Minnesota

67% of the 15 inspections with a recorded headcount were at sites with 26 to 100 employees. The headcount is the inspected site's, not the employer's total.

Employees at the inspected site
1 to 101
11 to 254
26 to 10010
NAICS sector, by items
Manufacturing22
NAICS industry group, by items
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing5
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing4
Machine Shops; Turned Product; and Screw, Nut, and Bolt Manufacturing3

When the items were issued

By quarter of FY2025: Oct to Dec 2024: 0; Jan to Mar 2025: 8; Apr to Jun 2025: 7; Jul to Sep 2025: 7.

Who enforced in Minnesota

Minnesota has an OSHA-approved State Plan that ordinarily covers private-sector employers and state and local government workers. All 22 of the items were recorded by the State Plan's office. A State Plan may have standards of its own. The paragraphs on this page are the federal 29 CFR numbers recorded in OSHA's data, and this page does not say which Minnesota rule applies to a given workplace. OSHA's page on the Minnesota State Plan, with its coverage.

Minnesota against the other states

Minnesota ranks 5th of the 25 states with items under 29 CFR 1910.1026 in this data. The most items: Wisconsin 28; Michigan 27; Pennsylvania 25; Illinois 24; Minnesota 22. In all, the data record 223 citation items under 29 CFR 1910.1026; the 22 in Minnesota are 9.9% of them. Penalty maximums: OSHA penalties in Minnesota.

Next steps for a Minnesota employer

Counts by HazComFast from the Department of Labor's OSHA enforcement data, extracted Oct 13, 2026; deleted items left out, 29 CFR numbers only. They are not figures OSHA publishes for the state, and the live database can change them. Same data source and method as our HazCom enforcement study. Not legal advice.