Lead medical removal after an eighteen-month period

December 23, 1986
Mr. Robert N. Steinwurtzel
Collier, Shannon, Rill & Scott
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Steinwurtzel:
This is in response to your inquiry of May 1, regarding the medical removal protection (MRP) provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) lead standard, 29 CFR 1910.1025(k). We apologize for the delay in responding to your letter.
In the situation you describe in your letter an employer voluntarily removed an employee from exposure to airborne concentration of lead above the action level pursuant to 29 CFR 1910.1025(k)(2), throughout the eighteen month period.
In response to your specific question:

1. At the expiration of the 18 month voluntary MRP period, the employer is still required to provide to the employee a medical examination in accordance with 29 CFR. [Citation ends here in the OSHA source.]
2. Voluntary removal clearly may be continued beyond 18 months along with MRP benefits.
3. Assuming that the same medical conditions were present, good medical practices would again dictate removal.
4. Each new occurrence constituting removal, either pursuant to the standards provisions for voluntary removal or temporary removal, causes the process to cycle.
5. Such limitations are construed as partial voluntary removals. The lead standard does not speak to such issues, accordingly, employee rights to overtime and benefits do not fall within OSHA purview.
6. This depends on the sequence of events. Once circumstances constitute a removal, either temporary or voluntary, then such action would be improper. In other words, a retrospective decision to administratively reduce exposure short circuits the standard's MRP provisions. An employer upon hiring, or unilaterally, may choose to administratively control exposures as long as these actions do not interfere or impede MRP removals that are underway or pending.

The above answers are regretfully as complex as your questions. Many variables are possible that would effect our answers on similar issues. Exposure levels and changes in workplace condition are among the dependent variables.
Please feel free to contact us again if further assistance is needed.
Sincerely,
John B. Miles, Jr., Director
Directorate of Field Operations
[Corrected 08/16/2007]

[Requester letter reproduced on OSHA page; omitted here. Its printed May 1, 1988 date conflicts with the reply's December 23, 1986 date.]