Date of Adoption: May 26, 2000.

Purpose: BACKGROUND: WMSDs are serious ailments resulting in material impairment to health and functional capacity. WMSDs do not kill workers, but they can have devastating impact on their lives and livelihoods. The cardinal signs and symptoms include pain, motor weakness, sensory deficits and restricted ranges of motion. These can be severely debilitating, but even in modest, early stages they can interfere with both work and family life. Also, problems that are reversible in early stages can become permanently disabling.

WMSDs are the largest category of injuries and illnesses affecting Washington workers. There are at least 52,000 WMSD workers' compensation claims for the neck, back and upper extremity accepted yearly in the state of Washington. The total annual direct cost of all WMSDs is more than $410 million. WMSDs account for about 30% of all workers' compensation claims and more than 40% of the total costs. The average annual risk of all neck, back and upper extremity compensable WMSDs is 134 per 10,000 employees. These risks are much greater than for other workplace risks and far exceed any reasonable definition of "average risk."

There is strong scientific evidence that jobs and tasks with various physical risk factors expose workers to preventable hazards that can cause or aggravate WMSDs. These risk factors include awkward postures; high hand force; highly repetitive motions; repeated impact; heavy, frequent, or awkward lifting; and moderate to high vibration.

•

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has concluded that "A substantial body of credible epidemiologic research provides strong evidence of an association between musculoskeletal disorders and certain work-related physical factors when there are high levels of exposure and especially in combination with exposure to more than one physical factor (e.g., repetitive lifting of heavy objects in extreme or awkward postures." (Bernard, 1997)

•

The National Academy of Sciences has concluded that "there is little to shake our confidence in the thrust of our conclusions, which draw on converging results from many disciplines, using many methods: There is a higher incidence of reported pain, injury, loss of work, and disability among individuals who are employed in occupations where there is a high level of exposure to physical loading than for those employed in occupations with lower levels of exposure." (NRC, 1999)

Among the hundreds of scientific studies that have examined the relationship between workplace exposures and MSDs there are some that purport to provide evidence for the lack of workplace causation. L&I has considered these and finds that they do not invalidate the agency's conclusions about the positive relationship between physical risk factors and WMSDs.

There are many positive examples of ergonomics activities effectively reducing WMSDs in Washington workplaces. However, after more than ten years of working with employers and others on a voluntary basis, an L&I survey found that 60% of employers report no efforts to reduce WMSD hazards. Even among those employers who recognize that WMSDs have occurred in their workplaces 40% report no efforts to reduce the hazards that may cause them.

L&I also determined that relying on existing regulations to address WMSD hazards would be an inadequate alternative to rule making. Existing general rules such as the accident prevention program standard (WAC 296-24-040), management's responsibility (WAC 296-24-020) and the safeplace standards (WAC 296-24-073) do establish an obligation for employers to address recognized hazards that can cause WMSDs. These have been used as the basis for WISHA inspections and consultation visits in the past. However, these general regulations do not provide employers, employees or L&I staff with clear enough direction regarding which exposures must be controlled, what control measures must be implemented, or how the department will assess compliance. They only require an employer to take some unspecified actions to address hazards. Therefore they have not been used often.

RULE DEVELOPMENT: L&I began the rule development process in October 1998. Before drafting the proposed rule, L&I actively engaged the business, labor and health professional communities in detailed discussions. These discussions included nine public rule development conferences around the state in late 1998, which were followed by the work of two advisory committees in the first half of 1999. These activities were followed by numerous informal discussions with employer and employee organizations.

PUBLIC COMMENTS: The proposed rule was filed November 15, 1999, followed by fourteen formal public hearings in seven cities around the state. Two hundred forty-nine witnesses testified. L&I received more than eight hundred fifty post-hearing comments.

SUMMARY OF ADOPTED NEW REQUIREMENTS: For WAC 296-62-051 Part A-1, Ergonomics, WISHA's adopted rule includes the following:

1. The rule applies only to employers with "caution zone jobs," those where any employee's typical work includes physical risk factors specified in the rule. "Caution zone jobs" are not prohibited and they may not be hazardous.

2. Employers with "caution zone jobs" must ensure that employees working in or supervising these jobs receive ergonomics awareness education. These employers also must analyze the caution zone jobs to determine if they have hazards.

3. Employers may choose their own method and criteria for identifying and reducing WMSD hazards or may use the department's specified criteria.

4. If jobs have WMSD hazards the employer must reduce exposures below hazardous levels or to the degree technologically and economically feasible.

5. Employers may continue to use methods of reducing WMSD hazards that were in place before the rule adoption date as long as the methods, taken as a whole, are as effective as the requirements of the rule.

6. Employers must provide for and encourage employee participation in activities required by the rule.

7. An extended implementation schedule based on industry type and employer size allows employers, especially small businesses, ample time to prepare for compliance.

8. The department will work with and assist employer and employee groups in implementing the rule. This includes developing guides and models, identifying industry "best practices," establishing inspection policies and procedures, conducting demonstration projects, and providing information on ergonomics.

Topic: Ergonomics.

Statutory Authority for Adoption: RCW 49.17.010, [49.17].040, and [49.17].050.

Adopted under notice filed as WSR 99-23-067 on November 15, 1999 (published in two parts in both Issue 99-23 and Issue 99-24), and WSR 00-04-075 on February 1, 2000.

Changes Other than Editing from Proposed to Adopted Version: WAC 296-62-05101 What is the purpose of this rule?

•	Added the word "specific" to the first sentence for clarity.
•	Deleted the last sentence about demonstration employers testing guidelines, best practices, etc. because it repeats information in WAC 296-62-05160 NOTE (4).

WAC 296-62-05103 Which employers are covered by this rule?

•

Changed the last sentence to read "A "caution zone job" is a job where an employee's typical work activities include any of the specific risk factors listed below." Language was modified to clarify intent or meaning without changing requirements in the proposal. This was necessary because comments indicated that the proposed language was unclear or could be too easily misunderstood.

WAC 296-62-05105 What is a "caution zone job"?

•	Reformatted the table to make it easier to use. The bullets have been replaced with numbers, which are easier to reference and which better indicate the analysis of "caution zone jobs" is complete if the work activities reviewed do not contain any of the specific risk factors identified in numbers 1-14.
•	"Workday" was changed to "day" for clarity throughout the "caution zone" table.
•	At the top of the table:

⧫	In response to comments, "typical" work activities are defined in the new language to make it clear that incidental or occasional exposures are not covered under the rule.
⧫	"Duration" was added to clarify intent or meaning without changing requirements in the proposal. This was necessary because comments indicated that the proposed language was unclear or could be too easily misunderstood.

•	Changes within the table itself include the following:

(2) Wrist(s) was removed because comments noted that a bent wrist alone (without added force or repetition) would not be appropriate to address. Language was added to clarify this risk factor is only applicable to work activities without support and the ability to vary posture. Comments noted the need to clarify that the rule should not address situations where employees voluntarily assumed awkward postures and could easily change them.

(3)(4) Split out squatting and kneeling into separate bullets. Editorial changes only.

(5) Under "High Hand Force," the determination of pinch force when using the weight of an object was clarified to be the weight of an "unsupported" object. Direct pinch force measurement or estimate (4 or more pounds per hand) was also added as an element of this subsection, with an example for estimating what 4 or more pounds per hand would be comparable to. The actual risk factor in high hand force is the pinch or grip force itself, for which object weight is merely one surrogate measure. Testimony during the public hearings addressed this deficiency. While the weight of objects handled is the simplest method for estimating hand force, the department added language on how to estimate pinch or grip forces in other simple ways.

(6) Under "High Hand Force," the determination of grip force when using the weight of an object was clarified to be the weight of an "unsupported" object. Direct grip force measurement or estimate (10 or more pounds per hand) was also added as an element of this subsection, with an example for estimating what 10 or more pounds per hand would be comparable to. While there is some evidence for 6 pounds of grip force as a risk factor, the evidence is stronger at higher force levels of 9 to 10 pounds, so this risk factor was changed to gripping 10 pounds. The actual risk factor in high hand force is the pinch or grip force itself, for which object weight is merely one surrogate measure. Testimony during the public hearings addressed this deficiency. While the weight of objects handled is the simplest method for estimating hand force, the department added language on how to estimate pinch or grip forces in other simple ways.

(9) Sentence was changed to "Using the hand (heel/base of palm) or knee as a hammer more than 10 times per hour more than 2 hours total per day." Language was added to clarify the portion of the hand that this risk factor addresses.

⧫	The heading "Moderate to High Vibration" was changed to "Moderate to High Hand-Arm Vibration," this language was added to clearly specify that this risk factor applies only to hand-arm vibration.

WAC 296-62-05120 Which employees must receive ergonomics awareness education and when?

•	In subsection (1) a sentence was added to clarify that department-provided materials can be used to meet the basic awareness education requirements of the rule.

WAC 296-62-05122 What must be included in ergonomics awareness education?

•	Numbers were changed to bullets.
•	Language was added to the first sentence to provide examples of a number of different ways that awareness education could be provided.
•	First bullet language changed to focus the awareness education information about risk factors on all of the factors covered by the rule. This allows the awareness education to be truly "portable" and avoids the need for reeducation in the event an employee moves to a new job (or has a change in their existing job) with a different caution zone job risk factor(s). Comments noted the difficulty employers would have if the awareness education was not portable between different types of jobs.

WAC 296-62-05130 What options do employers have for analyzing and reducing WMSD hazards?

•	First sentence was changed to "All covered employers must determine whether "caution zone jobs" have WMSD hazards and must reduce the WMSD hazards identified as described below." Editorial changes for clarity and simplicity.

In subsection (1) under the General Performance Approach:

•	The wording "The employer must choose criteria for this analysis that are as effective as widely accepted nationally recognized criteria such as" was replaced with "The employer must use hazard control levels as effective as the recommended levels in widely used methods such as." Comments requested that the term "as effective as" be clarified. This language makes it clear that measurement of effectiveness is hazard-based and if a general performance method is chosen it must include recommended hazard control levels as effective as those found in the examples given. Comments noted that there is no system of national recognition for ergonomics programs. "Widely used" is clearer and more reasonable.
•	Liberty Mutual Manual Handling Tables were taken out of the method examples because the tables do not include a recommended hazard control level.
•	Language added to clarify the Department of Energy ErgoEASER example includes only their lifting guidelines.
•	The correct literature reference was added to the NIOSH Lifting Equation.
•	Three new widely used method examples were added:

⧫	Applicable ACGIH threshold limit values for physical agents,
⧫	Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) and
⧫	Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA).

In subsection (2) under the General Performance Approach:

•	Changed letters to bullets.
•	"Recovery cycle" was replaced by "recovery time" for better understanding.
•	"Vibration" was changed to "hand-arm vibration," this language was added to clearly specify that this risk factor applies only to hand-arm vibration.

In subsection (4) for both General Performance and Specific Performance Approach: The phrase "technologically and economically" was added to "feasible." Comments requested clarification of the term "feasible." Adding the phrase "technologically and economically" clarifies and limits the meaning in accordance with agency intent.

In subsection (5) under the General Performance Approach:

•	"Measures used by employers to reduce WMSD hazards" was replaced with "Employers must reduce WMSD hazards as described below by:" and subsections (5)(a) and (5)(b) were changed; comments noted that the language on order of preference for controls was not clear. Language was modified to clarify the meaning. This language makes it clear that if the first preference controls have not reduced the WMSD hazards below the hazard level, then (feasible) interim measures are to be used to supplement the controls and further reduce exposures.
•	We added subsection (5)(c) because many comments noted a concern that feasible controls could include reducing full-time workers or hiring only part-time workers to reduce hazardous exposures. Language was added to clarify the intent in regards to this issue.
•	Two examples of controls (work schedule modification and kneepads) were eliminated to simplify the lists and provide the clearest examples.

In subsection (6) under General Performance Approach:

•	Letters were changed to bullets.
•	First bullet wording was changed from "the hazards of the job or task" to "the hazards of the work activities" for clarity.

In subsection (7) under General Performance Approach and Specific Performance Approach:

•	Letters were changed to bullets.
•	In the last bullet, the phrase "technologically and economically" was added to "feasible." Comments requested clarification of the term "feasible." Adding the phrase "technologically and economically" clarifies and limits the meaning in accordance with agency intent.

WAC 296-62-05140 How must employees be kept involved and informed?

•	In subsection (2) changed letters to bullets.

WAC 296-62-05150 How are terms and phrases used in this rule?

•	Definitions were added for:

⧫	Full Time Equivalent (FTE), Definition added to clarify meaning of FTE as used in the implementation timeline.
⧫	High Hand-Arm Vibration Levels, Moderate Hand-Arm Vibration Levels Definitions added for clarity. Comments noted need for additional definition.
⧫	Work Activities Definition added for clarity. Comments noted need for additional definition.

•	Definitions and literature references were added for ACGIH threshold limit values for physical hazards, REBA, and RULA. Reference added for new method example included in WAC 296-62-05130(1) (General Performance Approach).
•	"Caution zone jobs": Editorial changes only were made for clarity.
•	Liberty Mutual Manual Handling Tables definition: Reference for this method example in WAC 296-62-05130(1) (General Performance Approach) was removed because the Tables do not include a recommended hazard control level.
•	Added the literature reference to NIOSH Lifting Equation, 1991 by Waters, et al. 1993. Additional reference added for clarity.
•	"Recovery Cycles" was changed to "Recovery Time" for ease in understanding.
•	Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs), wording was changed from "Occupational" disorders to "Work-related" for clarity.

WAC 296-62-05160 When must employers comply with this rule?

•	Dates were added to clarify when the requirements would be enforced.
•	Two industries in the list of high-risk SIC codes were dropped (411, 734) and two new ones added (078, 836) to reflect the most current data available on the highest risk industries for combined state fund and self-insured compensable nontraumatic soft tissue disorders (1992-1998).
•	Comments noted that small employers who may hire a large number of employees for short periods of time would be treated as if they had the resources of large employers if the implementation timeline were based on overall number of employees. Language was modified to base the implementation timeline on annual full time equivalents (FTEs) to address this concern. Language was also modified to base the implementation timeline on annual FTEs per employer rather than per individual workplace. This change was made to simplify and clarify implementation based on SIC codes. Identification of SIC codes to the individual worksite level is more complex and could be difficult for employers to identify and apply.
•	The implementation timelines were extended to allow employers more time to understand the rule requirements, plan, and obtain assistance if necessary before compliance begins. Comments noted the need for more time for implementation. The dates for ergonomic awareness education to be completed were moved back to the dates for hazard analysis to be completed. In addition, the time frame for hazard analysis to be completed was moved back three months for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th groups of employers in the implementation schedule. These changes provide an additional nine months for each of the four groups in the implementation schedule before any requirements would be enforced.
•	The "effective date" column of the implementation schedule was removed, as it was not necessary. Dates were added to the implementation schedule to clarify when the requirements would be enforced.

WAC 296-62-05160: NOTE, Help for employers in implementing the rule.

•	NOTE 3. Changed the phrase "prior to the first effective date" to "before the rule is enforced" to reflect the fact that the "effective date" was removed from the implementation schedule.
•	NOTE 4. Changed title from "Testing Guidelines with Demonstration Employers" to "Conducting Demonstration Projects" and combined the sentences within the note to remove unnecessary language, and to make it clear the department intends to work on demonstration activities with both employers and employees.

WAC 296-62-05170 Appendices.

This section was removed as unnecessary.

WAC 296-62-05172 Appendix A: Illustrations of physical risk factors.

•	Drawings in this appendix were updated to illustrate changes made to risk factors in the caution zone (WAC 296-62-05105) or in Appendix B.
•	Illustrations were labeled for clarity.
•	Different illustrations were added to clarify ulnar deviation.
•	"Grasping" was changed to "gripping" to be consistent with the language used in the rule.
•	While there is some evidence for 6 lbs. of grip force as a risk factor, the evidence is stronger at higher force levels of 9 to 10 lbs., so this risk factor was changed to gripping 10 lbs. or more.

WAC 296-62-05174 Appendix B: Criteria for analyzing and reducing WMSD hazards for employers who choose the Specific Performance Approach.

•	At the top of the table, the wording has changed from "For each "caution zone job" find any physical risk factors that apply. Reading across the page, determine if all of the conditions are present in the job. If they are, a WMSD hazard exists and must be reduced (see WAC 296-62-05130(4), specific performance approach)" "For each "caution zone job" find any physical risk factors that apply. Reading across the page, determine if all of the conditions are present in the work activities. If they are, a WMSD hazard exists and must be reduced below the hazard level or to the degree technologically and economically feasible (see WAC 296-62-05130(4), specific performance approach)." Language modified here to be consistent with language used elsewhere in the rule (i.e. "work activities," and "below the hazard level or to the degree technologically and economically feasible").
•	Throughout Appendix B, "workday" was changed to "day" for clarity.
•	Under "Awkward Posture" changes include the following:

⧫	Within the shoulders section: "Holding the hands above the head" was changed to "Working with the hands above the head," for better understanding.
⧫	Under "Neck": The description of the risk factor was changed to "working with the neck bent more than 45° (without support or the ability to vary posture)." Language was added to include "without the ability to vary posture." Comments noted that language was needed to clarify that the rule should not address situations where employees voluntarily assumed awkward postures and could easily change them. Language also added for clarity.
⧫	Under "Back": The description of the risk factor was changed to "working with the back bent forward more than 30° (without support or the ability to vary posture)." The same changes were made to the second box under "Back." Language was added to include "without the ability to vary posture." Comments noted that language was needed to clarify that the rule should not address situations where employees voluntarily assumed awkward postures and could easily change them. Language also added for clarity.
⧫	Kneeling on hard surfaces was deleted. The distinction between kneeling on hard or soft surfaces was removed because evidence was not strong. Duration was kept at the higher level (four hours) because the scientific evidence was stronger at this exposure level.

•	Under "High Hand Force" changes were the following:

⧫

The visual aid column illustrations were labeled for clarity.

⧫

Under "Arms, wrists, hands": The determination of pinch force when using the weight of an object was clarified to be the weight of an "unsupported" object. Direct pinch force measurement or estimate (four or more pounds per hand) was also added as an element of this subsection, with an example for estimating what four or more pounds per hand would be comparable to. Public comments noted that the proposed language was deficient in addressing actual pinch forces.

>

In the "combined with" column, language was added to further clarify risk factors for bent wrists. The angle for extension of the wrist was increased from 30° to 45° based on the strength of the evidence. Ulnar deviation (with illustration) was added to be consistent with the risk factor for gripping.

•

Under "Arms, wrists, hands": The determination of grip force when using the weight of an object was clarified to be the weight of an "unsupported" object. Direct grip force measurement or estimate (ten or more pounds per hand) was also added as an element of this subsection, with an example for estimating what ten or more pounds per hand would be comparable to. Public comments noted that the proposed language was deficient in addressing actual grip forces.

⧫	In the "combined with" column language was added to further clarify risk factors for bent wrists. The angle for extension of the wrist was increased from 30° to 45° based on the strength of the evidence.
⧫	Illustrations were labeled for clarity. An additional illustration was added to clarify ulnar deviation.

•	"Under Highly Repetitive Motion" changes were the following:

⧫

"Neck, shoulders, elbows, wrists, hands." in the "combined with" column, when "using the same motion with little or no variation," "wrists bent 30°," added "flexion, in extension 45° or ulnar deviation 30 degrees." Language was added to further clarify risk factors for bent wrists. The angle for extension of the wrist was increased from 30° to 45° based on the strength of the evidence. The same information was added to "awkward posture," as with "wrist bent." Language was added for clarity and consistency with other subsections.

⧫

The example given for intensive keying was dropped because a definition of intensive keying is included in the rule.

•	For "Repeated Impact": Wording was changed from "Using the hand as a hammer more than once per minute" to "Using the hand (heel/base of palm) as a hammer more than once per minute" to clarify the portion of the hand this risk factor addresses.
•	Changes made to the "Heavy, Frequent or Awkward Lifting" table include the following:

⧫	Step 2, changed the first sentence from "Where are the employee's hands at the beginning of the lift?" to "Where are the employees hands when they begin to lift or lower the object?" Language was added to clarify that the lifting risk factor applies when an employee is lifting or lowering an object. Comments noted and the scientific literature supports that the hazards of lifting may also exist when lowering an object.
⧫	Changes were made to the table. The department received testimony, supported by scientific literature that the "Unadjusted Weight Limits" in the lifting diagram were set too high, and would result in an unacceptable level of risk for injury. Therefore, the weight limits in the table were reduced to the equivalent of Lifting Indexes of less than 2.0 at the outer reaches (where the data is strongest) when calculated using the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation (1991).
⧫	Changes include the following:

>	Above the shoulder, near was 70 pounds and is now 65 pounds, mid was 45 pounds and now is 40 pounds, and extended was 35 pounds and now is 30 pounds.
>	Waist to shoulder, near was 80 pounds and now is 70 pounds, mid was 55 pounds and now is 50 pounds, and extended was 45 pounds and now is 40 pounds.
>	Knee to waist, near was 90 pounds now and remains 90 pounds, mid was 60 pounds and now is 55 pounds, and extended was 45 pounds and now is 40 pounds.
>	Below the knee, near was 80 pounds and now is 70 pounds, mid was 55 pounds, and now is 50 pounds, and extended was 40 pounds and now is 35 pounds.

⧫	Step 3, "Percentage Modifier" has been changed to "Limit Reduction Modifier" to clarify meaning without changing requirements in the proposal. Comments noted it would be good to use language that emphasized this factor and is used to reduce the weight limit as appropriate. Also the percentages have been changed to decimal equivalents to make it easier to calculate the final weight limit.
⧫	Step 4, we changed the calculation for the twisting adjustments from pounds to decimals to more accurately reflect scientific evidence.

>	"Percentage modifier" has been changed to "Limit Reduction Modifier" for consistency.

⧫

Step 5, in the last sentence, pertaining to reducing the identified hazard we have included the wording the hazard must be "reduced below the hazard level or to the degree technologically and economically feasible." Language added regarding hazard reduction to be consistent with the language used previously in the rule.

•	Changes made to the Vibration table include the following:
•	The title was changed from "Vibration" to "Hand-Arm Vibration" to clearly specify that this hazard applies only to hand-arm vibration. The same change was made to the first sentence regarding the instructions to determine if a hazard exists.

⧫	Step 2, changed the wording from "workday" to "day" to be consistent within the rule.
⧫	Step 4, changed language from "If that point lies in the cross-hatched "Hazard" area above the upper curve, then the vibration must be controlled" to "If that point lies in the cross-hatched "Hazard" area above the upper curve, then the vibration must be reduced below the hazard level or to the degree technologically and economically feasible." Language added regarding hazard reduction to be consistent with the language used previously in the rule.
⧫	The hazard reduction language change is also reflected in the Example at the bottom of the page.

WAC 296-62-05176 Appendix C: Standard Industry Classification (SIC) codes.

•

SIC codes and their descriptions were added from the list of high-risk SIC codes in the implementation schedule for 078, Landscape and Horticultural Services and 836, Residential Care. These changes reflect the changes in the implementation schedule. These updates were based on the most current data available on the highest risk industries for combined state fund and self-insured compensable nontraumatic soft tissue disorders (1992-1998).

•

SIC codes and their descriptions were deleted from the list of high-risk SIC codes in the implementation schedule for 411 Local & Suburban Transportation, and 734 Services to Dwellings & Other Buildings. These changes reflect the changes in the implementation schedule. These updates were based on the most current data available on the highest risk industries for combined state fund and self-insured compensable nontraumatic soft tissue disorders (1992-1998).

Number of Sections Adopted in Order to Comply with Federal Statute: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0; Federal Rules or Standards: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0; or Recently Enacted State Statutes: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0.

Number of Sections Adopted at Request of a Nongovernmental Entity: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0.

Number of Sections Adopted on the Agency's Own Initiative: New 14, Amended 0, Repealed 0.

Number of Sections Adopted in Order to Clarify, Streamline, or Reform Agency Procedures: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0.

Number of Sections Adopted Using Negotiated Rule Making: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0; Pilot Rule Making: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0; or Other Alternative Rule Making: New 0, Amended 0, Repealed 0. Effective Date of Rule: July 1, 2002.

May 26, 2000

Gary Moore

Director

OTS-3457.10

NEW SECTION
WAC 296-62-051
Ergonomics.

[]

The purpose of this rule is to reduce employee exposure to specific workplace hazards that can cause or aggravate work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs). In workplaces where these hazards exist, employers must reduce them. Doing so will prevent WMSDs such as tendinitis, carpal tunnel syndrome and low back disorders. The rule is not designed to prevent injuries from slips, trips, falls, motor vehicle accidents or being struck by or caught in objects.

This rule contains three parts.

•	Part 1, WAC 296-62-05105, provides a quick way for employers to know if they are covered.
•	Part 2 requires covered employers to meet an employee-education requirement and identify WMSD hazards. If hazards exist, the employer must reduce them.
•	Part 3 shows covered employers when they must comply with this rule. An employer's type of business and number of employees determine how much time is permitted for compliance (3 to 6 years for fixing WMSD hazards).

The rule does not include any requirements for the medical management of WMSDs or change any requirements for handling industrial insurance claims. An employer will not be in violation of this rule solely because an employee develops a WMSD or related symptom.

[]

Employers with "caution zone jobs" are covered by this rule. A "caution zone job" is a job where an employee's typical work activities include any of the specific physical risk factors listed in WAC 296-62-05105.

[]

"Caution zone"

A "caution zone job" is a job where an employee's typical work activities include any of the specific physical risk factors listed below. Typical work activities are those that are a regular and foreseeable part of the job and occur on more than one day per week, and more frequently than one week per year.

• Employers having one or more "caution zone jobs" must comply with Part 2 of this rule. "Caution zone jobs" may not be hazardous, but do require further evaluation.

• This rule does not prohibit "caution zone jobs."

• Employers who have made a reasonable determination that they do not have "caution zone jobs" are not covered by this rule.

• Duration (for example, 2 hours) refers to the total amount of time per day employees are exposed to the risk factor, not how long they spend performing the work activity that includes the risk factor.

	Awkward Posture
	(1)	Working with the hand(s) above the head, or the elbow(s) above the shoulder, more than 2 hours total per day
	(2)	Working with the neck or back bent more than 30 degrees (without support and without the ability to vary posture) more than 2 hours total per day
	(3)	Squatting more than 2 hours total per day
	(4)	Kneeling more than 2 hours total per day
	High Hand Force
	(5)	Pinching an unsupported object(s) weighing 2 or more pounds per hand, or pinching with a force of 4 or more pounds per hand, more than 2 hours total per day (comparable to pinching half a ream of paper)
	(6)	Gripping an unsupported object(s) weighing 10 or more pounds per hand, or gripping with a force of 10 or more pounds per hand, more than 2 hours total per day (comparable to clamping light duty automotive jumper cables onto a battery)
	Highly Repetitive Motion
	(7)	Repeating the same motion with the neck, shoulders, elbows, wrists, or hands (excluding keying activities) with little or no variation every few seconds more than 2 hours total per day
	(8)	Performing intensive keying more than 4 hours total per day
	Repeated Impact
	(9)	Using the hand (heel/base of palm) or knee as a hammer more than 10 times per hour more than 2 hours total per day
	Heavy, Frequent or Awkward Lifting
	(10)	Lifting objects weighing more than 75 pounds once per day or more than 55 pounds more than 10 times per day
	(11)	Lifting objects weighing more than 10 pounds if done more than twice per minute more than 2 hours total per day
	(12)	Lifting objects weighing more than 25 pounds above the shoulders, below the knees or at arms length more than 25 times per day
	Moderate to High Hand-Arm Vibration
	(13)	Using impact wrenches, carpet strippers, chain saws, percussive tools (jack hammers, scalers, riveting or chipping hammers) or other hand tools that typically have high vibration levels more than 30 minutes total per day
	(14)	Using grinders, sanders, jig saws or other hand tools that typically have moderate vibration levels more than 2 hours total per day
		(Employers may assume that hand tools vibrating less than 2.5 meters per second squared (m/s2) eight-hour equivalent are not covered.)

[]

Employers may continue to use effective alternative methods established before this rule's adoption date. If used, the employer must be able to demonstrate that the alternative methods, taken as a whole, are as effective as the requirements of this rule in reducing the WMSD hazards of each job and providing for employee education, training and participation.

[]

(1) Employers must ensure that all employees working in or supervising "caution zone jobs" receive ergonomics awareness education at least once every three years. The employer may provide ergonomics awareness education or may rely on education provided by another employer or organization. Ergonomics awareness education materials provided by the department of labor and industries may be used to meet these requirements.

(2) When employees are assigned to work in or supervise "caution zone jobs," they must receive ergonomics awareness education within 30 calendar days, unless they have received it in the past three years. This requirement applies when the initial "awareness education" deadline in the implementation schedule (WAC 296-62-05160) has passed.

[]

Ergonomics awareness education (for example: Oral presentations, videos, computer-based presentations, or written materials with discussion) must include:

• Information on work-related causes of musculoskeletal disorders, including all caution zone risk factors listed in WAC 296-62-05105 (nonwork factors may be included as well);

• The types, symptoms and consequences of WMSDs and the importance of early reporting;

• Information on identifying WMSD hazards and common measures to reduce them; and

• The requirements of this ergonomics rule.

[]

All covered employers must determine whether "caution zone jobs" have WMSD hazards and must reduce the WMSD hazards identified as described below. Employers may choose either the general performance approach or the specific performance approach as follows:

WAC 296-62-05130 - Analyzing and reducing WMSD hazards:				WAC 296-62-05130 - Analyzing and reducing WMSD hazards:
General Performance Approach				Specific Performance Approach
(1)	The employer must analyze "caution zone jobs" to identify those with WMSD hazards that must be reduced. A WMSD hazard is a physical risk factor that by itself or in combination with other physical risk factors has a sufficient level of intensity, duration or frequency to cause a substantial risk of WMSDs. The employer must use hazard control levels as effective as the recommended levels in widely used methods such as the Job Strain Index, the lifting guidelines in the Department of Energy ErgoEASER, the ANSI S3.34-1986 (R1997) Hand Arm Vibration Standards, the 1991 NIOSH Lifting Equation, (as described in Waters 1993), the UAW-GM Risk Factor Checklists, applicable ACGIH threshold limit values for physical agents, Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA), or Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA).			(1)	The employer must analyze "caution zone jobs" to identify those with WMSD hazards that must be reduced. A WMSD hazard is a physical risk factor that exceeds the criteria in Appendix B of this rule.
(2)	The employer must analyze "caution zone jobs" using a systematic method that includes the following, if applicable:			(2)	Same as General Performance Approach.
	•	Physical demands specific to the worksite including posture, force, repetition, repeated impacts, hand-arm vibration, duration, work pace, task variability and recovery time;
	•	Layout of the work area, including reaches, working heights, seating and surfaces; and
	•	Manual handling requirements, including size, shape, weight, and packaging.
(3)	Individuals responsible for hazard analysis must know how to use the analysis method effectively and be informed about the requirements of this rule.			(3)	Individuals responsible for hazard analysis must know how to use the analysis provided in Appendix B effectively and be informed about the requirements of this rule.
(4)	The employer must reduce all WMSD hazards below the criteria chosen in WAC 296-62-05130(1) or to the degree technologically and economically feasible.			(4)	The employer must reduce all WMSD hazards below the criteria in Appendix B of this rule or to the degree technologically and economically feasible.
(5)	Employers must reduce WMSD hazards as described below by:			(5)	Same as General Performance Approach.
	(a)	Implementing controls that do not rely primarily on employee behavior to reduce WMSD hazards, such as the following:
		•	Changes to workstations and tools
		•	Reducing the size and weights of loads handled
		•	Process redesign to eliminate unnecessary steps or introduce task variety
		•	Job rotation
	(b)	If employers cannot reduce WMSD hazards below the hazard level using the controls identified above, they must supplement those controls with interim measures that primarily rely on individual work practices or personal protective equipment. Examples of such practices include the following:
		•	Impact gloves
		•	Team lifting
		•	Training on work techniques
	(c)	This rule does not require an employer to control WMSD hazards by replacing full-time employees with part-time employees or otherwise reducing an individual's hours of employment. If an employer has implemented all other technologically and economically feasible controls, and a WMSD hazard remains, the employer will be deemed in compliance with this subsection.
(6)	If measures to reduce WMSD hazards include changes in the job or work practices then job-specific training must be provided. This job-specific training must include:			(6)	Same as General Performance Approach.
	•	The hazards of the work activities;
	•	Safe work practices; and
	•	The proper use and maintenance of specific measures to reduce WMSD hazards that have been implemented.
(7)	No written ergonomics program is required. The employer must be able to demonstrate the following:			(7)	No written ergonomics program is required. The employer must be able to demonstrate that all WMSD hazards have been reduced below the criteria identified in Appendix B of this rule or to the degree technologically and economically feasible.
	•	The method used to analyze "caution zone jobs";
	•	The criteria used to identify WMSD hazards;
	•	The jobs with identified WMSD hazards; and
	•	The reduction of all WMSD hazards below the criteria chosen in WAC 296-62-05130(1) or to the degree technologically and economically feasible.

[]

(1) The employer must provide for and encourage employee participation in analyzing "caution zone jobs" and selecting measures to reduce WMSD hazards. Employers with eleven or more employees who are required to have safety committees (WAC 296-24-045), must involve this committee in choosing the methods to be used for employee participation.

(2) Employers with eleven or more employees must share the following information with the safety committee (if a committee is required by WAC 296-24-045). Employers who are not required to have a safety committee (WAC 296-24-045) must provide this information at safety meetings:

• The requirements of this rule;

• Identified "caution zone jobs";

• Results of the hazard analysis and/or identification of jobs with WMSD hazards; and

• Measures to reduce WMSD hazards.

(3) The employer must review its ergonomics activities at least annually for effectiveness and for any needed improvements. This review must include members of the safety committee where one exists or ensure an equally effective means of employee involvement.

[]

Note: Check L&I's WISHA Services web site at http://www.lni.wa.gov/wisha/ergo for current links to any of the web sites referred to in this section.

ACGIH threshold limit values for physical hazards - The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Thresholds Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents in the Work Environment, and Biological Exposure Indices (TLVs and BEIs). Available for purchase at the ACGIH web site at http://www.acgih.org.

ANSI S3.34-1986 (R1997) Hand Arm Vibration Standards - American National Standard Guide for the Measurement and Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration Transmitted to the Hand. ANSI S3.34-1986 (R1997). Available for purchase at the ANSI web site at http://web.ansi.org/default.htm.

"Caution zone jobs" - Jobs where an employee's typical work activities include any of the specific physical risk factors identified in WAC 296-62-05105. These jobs have a sufficient degree of risk to require ergonomics awareness education and job hazard analysis.

Department of Energy ErgoEASER - Ergonomics Education, Awareness, System Evaluation and Recording (ErgoEASER) software package. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (1995). Can be downloaded from the Department of Energy web site at http://tis.eh.doe.gov/others/ergoeaser/download.htm.

Ergonomics - The science and practice of designing jobs or workplaces to match the capabilities and limitations of the human body.

Full Time Equivalent (FTE) - The equivalent of one person working full-time for one year (2,000 worker hours per year). For example, two persons working half time count as one FTE.

High Hand-Arm Vibration Levels - Tools with vibration values equal to or greater than 10 meters per second squared (m/s²) eight-hour equivalent. Examples include some impact wrenches, carpet strippers, chain saws, and percussive tools.

Intensive Keying - Keying with the hands or fingers in a rapid, steady motion with few opportunities for temporary work pauses.

Job Strain Index - The Strain Index: A proposed method to analyze jobs for risk of distal upper extremity disorders, Moore, J.S., and A. Garg, (1995). Published in American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, volume 56, pages 443-458. Web site at http://sg-www.satx.disa.mil/hscoemo/tools/strain.htm.

Moderate Hand-Arm Vibration Levels - Tools with vibration values between 2.5 and 10 meters per second squared (m/s²) eight-hour equivalent. Examples include some grinders, sanders, and jig saws.

NIOSH Lifting Equation, 1991 - Waters, T.R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A., and Fine, L.J. (1993). Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Published in Ergonomics, volume 36 (7), pages 749-776. For a manual on using the lifting equation see: Applications Manual for Revised Lifting Equation, Waters, T., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A., (1994). Available from the National Technical Information Center (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161. 1-800-553-6847. Calculator web site at http://www.industrialhygiene.com/calc/lift.html. Application guideline web site at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/94-110.html.

Rapid Entire Body Assessment tool (REBA) - Hignett, S. and McAtamney, L. (2000) Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Published in Applied Ergonomics, volume 31, pages 201-205.

Recovery Time - Work periods with light task demands, or rest breaks, that permit an employee to recover from physically demanding work.

The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) - McAtamney, L. and Corlett, E.N. (1993) RULA: A survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Published in Applied Ergonomics, volume 24 (2), pages 91-99.

UAW-GM Risk Factor Checklists - UAW-GM Risk Factor Checklist 2, 1998. UAW-GM (United Auto Workers-General Motors) Center for Human Resources, Health and Safety Center, 1030 Doris Road, Auburn Hills, Michigan.

Work Activities - The physical demands, exertions, or functions of the job or task.

Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs) - Work-related disorders that involve soft tissues such as muscles, tendons, ligaments, joints, blood vessels and nerves. Examples include: Muscle strains and tears, ligament sprains, joint and tendon inflammation, pinched nerves, degeneration of spinal discs, carpal tunnel syndrome, tendinitis, rotator cuff syndrome. For purposes of this rule WMSDs do not include injuries from slips, trips, falls, motor vehicle accidents or being struck by or caught in objects.

[]

Employers covered by this rule must comply with its requirements by the dates shown.

INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

* Note:

SIC code is the employer's primary SIC based on hours of employment. See Appendix C of this rule for descriptions of these SIC codes.

Note: Help for employers in implementing the rule.

(1)	Developing Ergonomics Guides and Models
	The department will work with employer and employee organizations to develop guides for complying with this rule (for example, a model program for ergonomics awareness education). Employer use of these guides will be optional.
(2)	Identifying Industry "Best Practices"
	The department will work with employer and employee organizations to develop or identify methods of reducing WMSD hazards that will serve as examples of industry-specific "best practices." As industry-specific "best practices" are developed, they may be used to demonstrate employer compliance with the requirement to reduce WMSD hazards. Employers will not be restricted to the use of industry "best practices" for compliance.
(3)	Establishing Inspection Policies and Procedures
	The department will develop policies and procedures for inspections and enforcement of this rule before the rule is enforced. These policies and procedures will be communicated to employers and employees through mailing lists, business associations, labor unions and other methods before the department issues any citations or penalties.
(4)	Conducting Demonstration Projects
	Following adoption of this rule, the department will work with employers and employees to undertake demonstration projects to test and improve guidelines, "best practices" and inspection policies and procedures as they are developed.
(5)	Providing Information on Ergonomics
	The department will work with employer and employee organizations to collect and share the most effective examples of ergonomics training, job analysis, and specific solutions to problems. The department will make special efforts to share this information with the small business community.

[]

The following illustrations are provided as reference only. Some users of this rule may find the pictures aid their understanding of the text in WAC 296-62-05105.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

[]

For each "caution zone job" find any physical risk factors that apply. Reading across the page, determine if all of the conditions are present in the work activities. If they are, a WMSD hazard exists and must be reduced below the hazard level or to the degree technologically and economically feasible (see WAC 296-62-05130(4), specific performance approach).

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

Place illustration here.

[]

The descriptive titles for the SIC codes listed in the implementation schedule (WAC 296-62-05160) are provided below. SIC codes are established by the federal Office of Management and Budget and are listed in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987 edition.

SIC*	INDUSTRY	EXAMPLES
078	Landscape and Horticultural Services	• •	lawn and garden services ornamental shrub and tree services
152	General Building Contractors, Residential Buildings	• •	general contractors single family houses general contractors residential buildings other than single family
174	Masonry, Stonework, Tile Setting & Plastering	• • •	masonry, stone setting, and other stone work plastering, drywall, acoustical, and insulation work terrazzo, tile, marble, and mosaic work
175	Carpentry and Floor Work	• •	carpentry work floor laying and other floor work (NEC**)
176	Roofing, Siding and Sheet Metal	•	installation of roofing, siding, and sheet metal work
177	Concrete Work	•	includes portland cement and asphalt
242	Sawmills & Planing Mills	• • •	sawmills and planing mills hardwood dimension and flooring mills special products sawmills (NEC**)
421	Trucking & Courier Service, not Air	• • •	trucking local trucking with or without storage courier services (except by air)
451	Air Transportation, Scheduled and Air Courier	• •	scheduled air transportation air courier services Note: WISHA jurisdiction excludes planes in flight.
541	Grocery Stores	• • •	supermarkets food stores grocery stores
805	Nursing & Personal Care	• • •	skilled nursing care facilities intermediate care facilities nursing and personal care facilities (NEC**)
836	Residential Care	•	Establishments primarily engaged in the provision of residential social and personal care for children, the aged, and special categories of persons with some limits on ability for self-care, but where medical care is not a major element.

*SIC or NAICS equivalent. In 2000, federal agencies that produce statistical data will adopt NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) codes and begin to phase out the SIC codes. State and local government agencies also will use this new coding structure to promote a common language for categorizing today's industries.

**NEC - not elsewhere classified.

[]

© Washington State Code Reviser's Office