Back to Federal guidance

Hazard communication for vehicle maintenance chemicals

Summary A technicians’ association asked whether common vehicle-shop fluids counted as hazardous chemicals and whether cotton uniforms were protective equipment. OSHA said antifreeze, oil, and diesel fell under its hazard-communication definition and workers needed their hazard information. It said employers should assess splash hazards and supply suitable protective clothing where needed.
Document
Federal opinion letter
Agency
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Document number
1997-05-29-1
Date issued
May 29, 1997
Status
Active
Status last verified October 9, 2026

Apply this to your situation

This page explains the general guidance. Ask about your specific situation and see what current federal labor law says, with citations.

About this page: The full text below is the official document from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Ezel adds the plain-English summary and tracks the document's status. The official source linked on this page is authoritative for any reliance.

May 29, 1997

Mr. Chris Moore, President
Association of Civilian Technicians
Lone Star Chapter 100
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Moore:

This letter is in response to your recent telephone inquiry concerning a MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION dated 20 December, 1996, that was sent to us for comment. Col. Barkley's statement about the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) definition of a hazardous chemical is incorrect. In 29 CFR 1910.1200, OSHA simply states a hazardous chemical is any chemical which is a physical hazard or a health hazard. Antifreeze, oil and diesel are at the minimum irritants and, as such, would all fall under the category of "hazardous chemical." The material safety data sheets (MSDSs) for these chemicals should provide you with the health hazards information and the precautions to take if exposed to the chemical.

Cotton uniforms should not be regarded as personal protective equipment (PPE) in this case. If chemical splashes are expected, then impermeable clothing should be worn. Uniforms in the vehicle maintenance setting are provided to employees to prevent their own clothes from becoming torn or dirty. If there is a potential for asbestos exposure, then the employer is responsible for providing and washing of the personal protective clothing or providing disposable coveralls.

Col. Barkley's memo essentially follows 29 CFR 1910.132 in its approach to determine if additional personal protective equipment is needed and if uniforms are being improperly regarded as PPE. Supervisors must assess the workplace for hazards, select and provide the proper protective equipment, communicate selection decisions to the employees, ensure employees follow correct procedures, and ensure employees wear the proper equipment.

We hope this answers your questions. If you need further assistance, please feel free to contact Craig Moulton of the Office of Health Compliance Assistance at (202) 219-7380.

Sincerely,

Stephen Mallinger, Acting Director
Office of Health Compliance Assistance

[Requester letter reproduced on OSHA page; omitted here.]

What does federal law require in your situation?

Ezel checks current federal labor law against your facts and answers with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace