Share article
Federal OSHA sets the nationwide floor for hearing conservation. But 22 states and territories operate their own OSHA-approved programs — called State Plans — that may go further. For employers with facilities in multiple states, or in high-regulation states like California, understanding which rules apply and where they diverge from federal 29 CFR 1910.95 is not optional. This guide covers every State Plan, how they interact with federal OSHA, and the practical compliance implications for hearing conservation programs.
Soundtrace supports hearing conservation programs across all 50 states, with documentation designed to satisfy both federal OSHA 1910.95 and State Plan requirements simultaneously.
In State Plan states, the state standard governs — not federal 1910.95 directly. State Plans must be “at least as effective” as federal OSHA, but may exceed it. If you operate in California, Washington, Oregon, Michigan, or any of the other 19 State Plan states, you need to know your state’s specific requirements.
Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 authorizes states to develop and operate their own occupational safety and health programs. When a state submits a plan that meets federal OSHA’s criteria, OSHA approves it and the state assumes primary enforcement responsibility within its borders. Federal OSHA steps back from direct enforcement in those workplaces and instead monitors the state program.
The legal standard for approval is that the State Plan must be “at least as effective” (ALAE) as federal OSHA in protecting workers. In practice, this means State Plans must adopt standards that meet or exceed every element of the federal standard. They cannot have weaker requirements, but they can have stronger ones — and several do.
Federal OSHA provides up to 50% of the funding for each State Plan program and conducts annual Federal Annual Monitoring Evaluations (FAME) to verify continued effectiveness. The complete list of State Plans and contact information for each is maintained at osha.gov/stateplans.
Hearing conservation is one of the areas where State Plans have historically diverged most from the federal standard. California’s Title 8 CCR §§ 5096–5100 includes posting requirements and program elements that exceed 29 CFR 1910.95. Employers who simply replicate the federal standard in State Plan states may be out of compliance with their actual governing authority.
Not all State Plans are the same. There are two distinct categories, and understanding which applies to your workforce matters for compliance.
| Type | Who Is Covered | States / Territories |
|---|---|---|
| Full Coverage Plans | Private sector employers AND state & local government workers | 22 plans (21 states + Puerto Rico) |
| Government-Only Plans | State and local government workers only; private sector remains under federal OSHA | 7 plans (6 states + Virgin Islands) |
For most private-sector employers, what matters is whether the state has a Full Coverage Plan. If your facility is in a Full Coverage Plan state, the state standard governs your hearing conservation obligations. If your facility is in a Government-Only Plan state (like Connecticut, Illinois, or New York), your private-sector workers are still under federal OSHA 1910.95.
These states and territories have OSHA-approved programs covering both private-sector employers and state/local government workers. In each, the state standard — not federal 1910.95 — is the primary governing authority for private-sector hearing conservation programs. Links below go directly to each state’s official OSHA program page.
State agency: Alaska Occupational Safety & Health (AKOSH). Noise standard mirrors federal 1910.95 with no significant additional hearing conservation requirements for private-sector employers.
State agency: Arizona Division of Occupational Safety & Health (ADOSH). Noise standard equivalent to federal; enforcement follows state procedures.
State agency: California Division of Occupational Safety & Health (Cal/OSHA). Governed by Title 8 CCR § 5096 (noise limits) and § 5097 (hearing conservation program). See Cal/OSHA section below for details on how it exceeds the federal standard.
State agency: Hawaii Occupational Safety & Health Division (HIOSH). Noise and hearing conservation standards equivalent to federal 1910.95.
State agency: Indiana Department of Labor — IOSHA. Hearing conservation standard mirrors federal 1910.95.
State agency: Iowa Division of Labor — Iowa OSHA. Noise standard follows federal 1910.95.
State agency: Kentucky Labor Cabinet — OSH Program. Hearing conservation mirrors federal requirements.
State agency: Maryland Occupational Safety & Health (MOSH). Hearing conservation standard equivalent to federal 1910.95.
State agency: Michigan Occupational Safety & Health Administration (MIOSHA). Michigan uses its own General Industry Safety & Health Standard Part 380 for noise and hearing conservation. MIOSHA has historically maintained a robust enforcement posture. See notable differences below.
State agency: Minnesota OSHA (MNOSHA). Noise standard mirrors federal 1910.95; MNOSHA is an active enforcement agency.
State agency: Nevada Division of Industrial Relations — OSHA. Hearing conservation mirrors federal requirements.
State agency: New Mexico Environment Department — OSH Bureau. Noise standard follows federal 1910.95.
State agency: North Carolina Department of Labor — OSH Division. Noise and hearing conservation equivalent to federal; NC OSH is a large, active enforcement program given the state’s significant manufacturing base.
State agency: Oregon Occupational Safety & Health (OR-OSHA). Oregon has its own noise exposure rule at OAR 437-002-0096. Notable for active outreach and consultation programs.
State agency: Puerto Rico Occupational Safety & Health Administration (PR OSHA). Noise standard mirrors federal 1910.95.
State agency: South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing & Regulation — OSHA. Hearing conservation standard equivalent to federal.
State agency: Tennessee Occupational Safety & Health Administration (TOSHA). Noise standard follows federal 1910.95. Tennessee has a significant manufacturing and automotive sector subject to hearing conservation requirements.
State agency: Utah Occupational Safety & Health (UOSH). Hearing conservation mirrors federal requirements.
State agency: Vermont Occupational Safety & Health Administration (VOSHA). Noise standard follows federal 1910.95.
State agency: Virginia Occupational Safety & Health (VOSH). Hearing conservation standard equivalent to federal 1910.95.
State agency: Washington State Department of Labor & Industries (L&I). Washington operates under the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA). Noise standard at WAC 296-817 has specific structure differences from federal 1910.95. See notable differences below.
State agency: Wyoming Occupational Safety & Health (WYOSHA). Hearing conservation mirrors federal 1910.95.
These states have OSHA-approved plans covering state and local government workers only. Private-sector employers and their workers in these states remain under federal OSHA 1910.95 jurisdiction.
| State / Territory | State Agency | Private Sector |
|---|---|---|
| Connecticut — CONN-OSHA | Connecticut Department of Labor — CONN-OSHA | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
| Illinois — IL OSHA | Illinois Department of Labor | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
| Maine — Maine OSHA | Maine Department of Labor — Bureau of Labor Standards | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
| Massachusetts — MOSHA | Massachusetts Department of Labor Standards | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
| New Jersey — NJ OSHA | New Jersey Department of Labor | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
| New York — NYSDOL | New York State Department of Labor | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
| U.S. Virgin Islands | Virgin Islands Department of Labor | Federal OSHA 1910.95 applies |
▶ Bottom line: If your private-sector facility is in Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, or New York, your governing hearing conservation standard is federal 29 CFR 1910.95 — not the state agency’s program, which only covers public employees.
The remaining states have no OSHA-approved State Plan. Federal OSHA has direct enforcement jurisdiction over both private-sector and (for some purposes) public-sector employers in these states. Hearing conservation is governed by federal 29 CFR 1910.95 in these jurisdictions.
Federal-jurisdiction states include: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, among others. A complete and current list is maintained at osha.gov/stateplans.
State Plan status occasionally changes. New Mexico and Maine have recently modified their plan status. Always verify the current jurisdictional status of a specific state directly at osha.gov/stateplans before making compliance decisions.
California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) operates under the California Department of Industrial Relations and enforces the most detailed and actively enforced state noise standard in the country. For any employer with California operations, understanding how Cal/OSHA’s requirements differ from federal 1910.95 is essential.
The California noise and hearing conservation standard is found at California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 8, Article 105:
| Requirement | Federal OSHA 1910.95 | Cal/OSHA CCR Title 8 |
|---|---|---|
| Action level | 85 dBA TWA | 85 dBA TWA (same) |
| PEL | 90 dBA TWA | 90 dBA TWA (same) |
| STS definition | 10 dB avg at 2000, 3000, 4000 Hz | 10 dB avg at 2000, 3000, 4000 Hz (same) |
| STS recording threshold | 25 dB HL avg at 2k/3k/4k Hz | 25 dB HL avg at 2k/3k/4k Hz (same) |
| Regulation posting | Not required | Required — copy of CCR Title 8 §§ 5096–5100 must be posted in the workplace (§ 5097(l)) |
| Employee observation of monitoring | Required upon request | Required — must provide opportunity to observe measurements |
| Audiometric test qualifications | CAOHC-certified technician or licensed audiologist/physician | Same, with Cal/OSHA-specific licensing verification requirements |
| HPD attenuation method | One of Appendix E methods | Uses 7 dB NRR derating per Cal/OSHA Appendix E methodology |
| Enforcement body | Federal OSHA | Cal/OSHA — state inspectors, separate penalty structure |
The posting requirement is the most commonly overlooked Cal/OSHA-specific obligation. Section 5097(l) requires that a copy of the noise regulations (CCR Title 8 §§ 5096–5100) be available to affected employees and posted in the workplace. Federal 1910.95 has no equivalent posting requirement. California employers who maintain technically compliant hearing conservation programs but omit this step are technically non-compliant with the state standard.
▶ Bottom line: For California employers, use CCR Title 8 Article 105 as your governing standard — not 29 CFR 1910.95. The core requirements are substantially similar, but the posting obligation, audiometric qualification nuances, and NRR derating methodology are Cal/OSHA-specific.
Washington’s Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) enforces noise and hearing conservation under WAC 296-817, the Hearing Loss Prevention rule. Washington’s standard is structured somewhat differently from federal 1910.95 but achieves equivalent protection. Key features include:
Michigan’s Occupational Safety & Health Administration (MIOSHA) enforces hearing conservation under General Industry Safety & Health Standard Part 380. Michigan is one of the more actively enforced State Plans, with MIOSHA conducting a substantial number of general industry inspections annually. The standard is equivalent to federal 1910.95 in substantive requirements but enforced through Michigan’s own administrative process with its own penalty and citation procedures.
Oregon’s OR-OSHA enforces noise and hearing conservation under Oregon Administrative Rules Division 2, Subdivision O. Oregon is notable for its free, employer-requested consultation program and its active outreach to manufacturers in the state’s wood products, food processing, and manufacturing sectors — all high-noise industries with significant hearing conservation obligations.
Minnesota’s MNOSHA program covers the state’s large manufacturing base, including medical device manufacturing, food processing, and fabricated metals — all high-noise sectors. MNOSHA enforces standards equivalent to federal 1910.95 and participates in federal OSHA’s national emphasis programs for hearing conservation.
North Carolina’s OSH Division is one of the larger State Plan enforcement programs in the country, reflecting North Carolina’s significant manufacturing, furniture, and textile sectors. The noise standard mirrors federal 1910.95; NC OSH has historically targeted high-noise manufacturing industries in its inspection programs.
For employers operating facilities across multiple states — including both State Plan and federal-jurisdiction states — a consistent, documented hearing conservation program that satisfies both the federal standard and all applicable state variations is both achievable and operationally sensible.
| Compliance Action | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Map your jurisdictions | Build a facility-by-facility matrix listing whether each location is in a State Plan state (full coverage), government-only plan state, or federal OSHA state |
| Identify state-specific additions | For State Plan states, review the state standard for any requirements that exceed federal 1910.95; at minimum, check California, Washington, and Michigan |
| Standardize to the highest bar | For most multi-state programs, adopting the California posting requirement and OR-OSHA/Washington consultation approach as universal practices adds minimal cost but eliminates compliance gaps |
| Documentation | Ensure audiometric records, noise monitoring data, HPD selection rationale, and training records are maintained in a form accessible for inspection by either federal OSHA or the applicable state agency |
| Penalty awareness | State Plan penalty structures differ from federal OSHA’s. California, Washington, and Michigan in particular have penalty frameworks and inspection processes that differ from the federal model; review current penalty schedules with qualified counsel |
▶ Bottom line: The safest multi-state strategy is to build a program that meets or exceeds the most stringent applicable standard and then document rigorously enough to demonstrate compliance to any enforcement agency. A well-documented program is the universal defense.
Soundtrace’s hearing conservation platform is designed to support compliance in all 50 states — federal OSHA and State Plan jurisdictions alike.
Get a Free Quote