Shall Vs. Should | Blog No. 119
- Keith Tyson, Senior Advisor
- 3 hours ago
- 3 min read
OSHA, from time to time, issues “interpretations” that explain how the various language in its regulations will be enforced. On June 5, 2015, an OSHA memorandum was issued that addressed several topics regarding RAGAGEP. One of the topics of the memorandum addressed the words “shall” and “should” as used in the RAGAGEP. While these two simple words should be straightforward in interpretation, we shall see that it is not necessarily the case.
First, “shall” was discussed as used in the RAGAGEP.
If an employer deviates from “shall” or “shall not” requirements in the employer’s adopted RAGAGEP (or applicable RAGAGEP if the employer has not specified RAGAGEP), OSHA will presume a violation.
Fairly straightforward, if it says “shall”, you must do the thing. It would also apply that “shall not” means the action is prohibited.
IIAR-2 is our RAGAGEP for the design, manufacture, and installation of closed-circuit refrigeration systems. The words “shall” and “shall not” appear 691 times within the text of IIAR-2, 2021. As a standard, IIAR-2 has a lot of mandatory requirements.
“Should” and “should not”, on the other hand, appear for a combined 181 times, and all but a few of these appear in the standard’s “informative” (i.e., not mandatory) appendices.
We can see from this simple review that most of what you read in IIAR-2 is mandatory, especially for new or modified systems. This shouldn’t be a surprise; after all, it is our RAGAGEP. But what about all those “shoulds”? They are not mandatory, so they don’t apply, right? We can disregard them at will, right?
Wrong!
OSHA’s interpretation stated it this way:
Use of the term “should” or similar language in the RAGAGEP reflects an acceptable and preferred approach, in the view of the publishing group, to controlling a recognized hazard. If a selected RAGAGEP provision is applicable to the covered process or particular situation, OSHA presumes that employer compliance with the recommended approach is acceptable.
How does a non-mandatory requirement in the RAGAGEP become a mandatory one? First, the publishing group (IIAR) decided that the topic was worthy of inclusion in the standard. The “informative appendix” material is all worthy material, and each provides acceptable and preferred methods for controlling certain hazards.
Being a recognized hazard, it is your responsibility to provide controls that will prevent the hazard from occurring. Since the informative requirements are not mandatory, you are allowed to use alternate methods that may be available. But you must address the hazard! It is not a matter of the requirement being mandatory or not. The hazard exists, and you must do something.
As stated in the memorandum:
If an employer chooses to use an alternate approach to the one the published “should” RAGAGEP says applies, the CSHO should evaluate whether the employer has determined and documented that the alternate approach is at least as protective, or that the published RAGAGEP is not applicable to the employer’s operation.
As an example, look at Appendix F (Informative), Pipe Hanger Spacing, Hanger Rod Sizing, and Loading. Table F1 lists information for maximum hanger rod spacing and minimum hanger rod sizes for various pipe sizes. The information in F1 would only be mandatory IF you do not have pipe hanger design calculations. Paragraph F1 states that “spacing does not apply where span calculations are made…”
If you have pipe hanger design calculations, then you have at least complied with and probably exceeded the F1 requirements. But if there are no calculations available, the F1 minimum requirements may become mandatory. I say “may” because there are exceptions to most code rules, and there could be one for this situation based on your jurisdictional requirements. You must still provide at least the same protection as the Appendix F requirements, regardless.
So, in order to be in compliance with RAGAGEP, all the “shall” and “should” information must be addressed. Look through the RAGAGEP’s information and ensure your process safety information contains adequate controls. That’s mandatory
For a comprehensive training on Anhydrous Ammonia, click here for our PSM Academy Ammonia Awareness training, to learn and earn a certificate of completion. Training is in English and Spanish. Use code SDS20 for a 20% discount on the entire purchase. For more information, email us at academy@machapsm.com.For a comprehensive training on Anhydrous Ammonia, click here for our PSM Academy Ammonia Awareness training, to learn and earn a certificate of completion. Training is in English and Spanish. Use code SDS20 for a 20% discount on the entire purchase. For more information, email us at academy@machapsm.com.