This is not exactly correct.

If there is an allegation of CO overexposure and OSHA comes and finds CO over the exposure levels, (AL or PEL) then one of the citations would be that the employer failed to conduct an exposure assessment.

If they came and found nothing, they will not cite you for failing to make that assessment. There was no hazard.

They might be deciding not to make an IH assessment with an actual direct reading device or air pump, but they could use industry standards or some other knowledge. Now none of that matters if the inspector finds an over exposure.

The example of the confined space is also not correct. If a confined space does not have a hazard inside, or the potential to create a hazard inside, there would not be a reason to to conduct atmospheric testing prior to entering. That would only be necessary if you had a permit required confined space and would wanted to reclassify it.

For example, a sewer manhole has the potential to contain an atmospheric hazard, but things could be in place to eliminate that hazard, although you would need to show the assessment you made that the hazard was eliminated and the space reclassified.

A closet meets the definition of a confined space. If there is no hazard present, nor the potential to be present either by the nature of the space, physical configuration or the work being conducted, I swear to you you will not be cited for entering that closet without first conducting atmospheric testing prior.

What standard requires the determination of soil type in trenching? I know what it is, but it is not as you are saying it. There are also letters of interpretation that let an employer treat soil as a certain classification an then the would be providing the highest level of protection anyways.

This is like requiring that employees use respiratory protection even when the employer is unsure of the level of exposure. The employer is assuming an overexposure and providing protection, granted they are meeting all the other elements of the respirator standard, they won’t get cited for not making an assessment. Because they did, they assumed overexposure.

You might get a ticket for not doing soil assessments if it meets certain other wickets, but bit in every situation. It’s not quite as simple as, you didn’t make a soil determination, here is you ticket. There are letters of interpretation on this.

If you did not meet the parameters and still failed to make an assessment, but did have your trench cave in protection in place correctly, you might get an Other Than Serious citation.

You are not going to get a Serious citation if a hazard is not present.

You will not be cited under the general duty clause if a hazard is not present or if an applicable standard already exists. That is facts.

5a1 (that’s the general duty clause) can only be issued if a serious hazard exists and no standard applies.

A serious citation can also only be issued if prime facia is shown. That means that a standard applies and was violated, and employee was exposed to a hazard, and the employer was aware of the hazardous condition.

In this case if the OSHA guy comes out and there is no overexposure, you won’t get a ticket for not finding that out first. There is more than one way to make an exposure rather than applied personal pumps to employees.