Professional Safety Guest Article: The I2P2 Debate


Although its fate is uncertain, the debate continues over the passage of a federal-level injury and illness prevention program (I2P2) regulation. OSHA continues to emphasize its commitment to I2P2. To date, the agency has issued a white paper on I2P2s and has indicated in its most recent regulatory agenda that it is targeting September 2014 for publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 2013). Before OSHA can issue the proposal, the agency must conduct a Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act Small Business Advocacy Review Panel of I2P2.

Against this backdrop, California, a model state program for reviewing I2P2 experience, made headlines when a study commissioned by the California Commission for Health, Safety and Workers’ Compensation (conducted by the RAND Corp.) indicated that its Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) regulation, which has been in effect since 1991, was generally ineffective in reducing injuries and illnesses in California.

Haynes and Boone, LLP’s OSHA Practice Group reviewed the California IIPP experience from a different set of historical data. The team reviewed published case law in California regarding the IIPP general industry regulation, namely, Title 8, California Code of Regulations, Section 3203. In doing so, the review team read decisions from both the administrative law judges (ALJs) and the Appeals Board to summarize trends during the past 15 years that the IIPP regulation has existed in its current Section 3203 form. The findings were reported in a comprehensive paper, “The California Experience: Legal Lessons Learned From the Injury and Illness Prevention Program Regulation.” This article focuses specifically on findings regarding the training provisions of California’s IIPP regulation.

Excerpted from Professional Safety, June 2, 2014. To view full article, click the PDF below.

The I2P2 Debate

Email Disclaimer