Health & Safety Code § 502.010 – Liability Under Other Law (Texas Hazard Communication Act)

Health & Safety Code § 502.010 Summary

This Texas statute clarifies a critical point regarding the Texas Hazard Communication Act (THCA). It states that an employer providing information about hazardous chemicals to an employee, as required by the THCA, does not absolve that employer or other responsible parties of their existing liabilities. Specifically, it does not diminish an employer’s responsibility for the health and safety of employees or others exposed to hazardous chemicals. It also doesn’t reduce an employer’s duty to prevent occupational diseases, nor does it lessen a manufacturer, producer, or formulator’s responsibility to warn ultimate users about hazardous chemicals, all as mandated by other laws.

Purpose of Health & Safety Code § 502.010

The legislative intent behind this particular section of the Texas Hazard Communication Act is to prevent a potential loophole where compliance with information-sharing requirements might be misinterpreted as fulfilling all safety obligations. The purpose of this statute is to ensure that the THCA serves as a minimum standard for communication, not as a comprehensive shield against broader legal duties concerning workplace safety and product warnings. It exists to reinforce that employers and manufacturers must continue to adhere to all other applicable laws, regulations, and common law duties related to providing a safe working environment, preventing illness, and ensuring consumers are adequately warned about chemical hazards. This provision ensures that providing hazard information does not excuse employers or manufacturers from their fundamental responsibilities to protect individuals from harm.

Real-World Example of Health & Safety Code § 502.010

Imagine a chemical manufacturing plant, “ChemSafe Inc.,” that uses various hazardous substances in its production process. ChemSafe Inc. meticulously complies with the Texas Hazard Communication Act: it labels all containers, maintains Safety Data Sheets (SDSs), and conducts regular training sessions for its employees on chemical hazards and safe handling procedures.

However, despite these efforts, a specific chemical used in one part of the plant is known to emit noxious fumes. While ChemSafe Inc. provides information about these fumes to employees, it fails to install proper ventilation systems in that specific area of the plant, as required by federal OSHA standards and general safety practices. An employee, Sarah, who works in that area, develops a severe respiratory illness due directly to prolonged exposure to these fumes, even though she was “informed” about the chemical’s risks.

In this scenario, Health & Safety Code § 502.010 becomes crucial. ChemSafe Inc. cannot argue that because it provided information to Sarah about the chemical’s dangers (thus complying with the THCA), it is relieved of liability for her injury. This statute clarifies that providing information does not affect:

1. Liability for health and safety: ChemSafe Inc. is still liable for Sarah’s health and safety, regardless of the information provided, because it failed to implement adequate physical safeguards like proper ventilation.
2. Responsibility to prevent occupational disease: The company still had a responsibility under other laws (like OSHA and common law negligence) to take actions, such as installing ventilation, to prevent Sarah’s occupational disease.
3. Manufacturer’s duty to warn: If ChemSafe Inc. was also the manufacturer, its duty to adequately warn ultimate users (beyond just employees, for example, if they sold the chemical) of the hazardous nature would also remain unaffected by their internal employee communication efforts.

Thus, Sarah could pursue a personal injury claim against ChemSafe Inc. based on its failure to provide a safe workplace and prevent occupational disease, despite the company’s THCA compliance.

Related Statutes

Several other statutes are directly related to Health & Safety Code § 502.010, either by imposing the “other law” duties it references or by governing the broader context of workplace safety and hazardous materials:

• Texas Health & Safety Code Chapter 502 (Texas Hazard Communication Act – generally): This entire chapter sets the framework for employers to provide information about hazardous chemicals to employees. Section 502.010 specifically clarifies that this framework does not supersede other liabilities.
• Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) (Federal Law): While a federal statute, OSHA’s regulations impose significant requirements on employers regarding workplace safety, including those involving hazardous chemicals (e.g., ventilation, personal protective equipment, emergency procedures). Texas employers must comply with these, and § 502.010 ensures THCA compliance does not excuse non-compliance with OSHA.
• Texas Workers’ Compensation Act (Texas Labor Code Title 5): This act governs the system for compensating employees injured on the job. While it generally limits an employer’s liability, it doesn’t preclude claims for gross negligence or certain other exceptions where an employer fails to provide a safe workplace, which could be relevant where § 502.010 indicates continued liability.
• Common Law Negligence: This broad area of law holds individuals and entities liable for failing to exercise reasonable care, resulting in harm. An employer’s duty to provide a safe workplace and a manufacturer’s duty to warn of product dangers are rooted in common law negligence, and § 502.010 explicitly states that providing information does not affect these duties.
• Texas Health & Safety Code Chapter 505 (Hazardous Substances on Property): This chapter deals with reporting and remediation of hazardous substances on commercial or industrial property, presenting another layer of responsibility for entities handling such materials.

Case Law Interpreting Health & Safety Code § 502.010

Direct interpretive case law specifically analyzing the nuances and applications of Texas Health & Safety Code § 502.010 is not readily available through general searches on Google Scholar. The statute itself functions primarily as a clarifying statement, reaffirming that the Texas Hazard Communication Act (THCA) does not diminish other existing legal duties. As such, it is more often cited or acknowledged within the context of broader personal injury or workplace safety litigation rather than being the primary subject of judicial interpretation. Courts typically rely on this section to underscore that compliance with the THCA’s information-sharing mandates does not serve as a complete defense against claims of negligence, premises liability, or other statutory violations related to hazardous chemical exposure.

Why Health & Safety Code § 502.010 Matters in Personal Injury Litigation

Health & Safety Code § 502.010 is a foundational statute in Texas personal injury litigation involving hazardous chemicals and workplace injuries, offering significant protection for plaintiffs and clarifying responsibilities for defendants.

For plaintiffs and their attorneys, this statute is critical because it prevents employers, manufacturers, producers, and formulators from using compliance with the Texas Hazard Communication Act (THCA) as an absolute shield against liability. If a worker or other individual suffers injury or illness due to exposure to hazardous chemicals, the fact that the employer “provided information” about those chemicals does not automatically defeat a claim. This ensures that avenues for negligence claims (e.g., failure to provide adequate safety equipment, ventilation, or safe working procedures), gross negligence claims, or claims based on violations of other state or federal safety regulations remain viable. It reinforces the idea that true safety goes beyond mere information dissemination.

For defendants (employers, manufacturers), the statute clarifies that their responsibilities extend beyond the minimum requirements of the THCA. While compliance with hazard communication is essential, it is not a “get out of jail free” card. They must still adhere to all other legal duties, including those arising from common law (like the duty to maintain a safe premises or product warnings) and other statutory or regulatory requirements (like OSHA standards). This means that a robust defense against chemical exposure claims must demonstrate adherence to all applicable safety standards, not just those related to information sharing.

In essence, this statute safeguards the integrity of personal injury claims by ensuring that the legislative intent of protecting individuals from hazardous chemicals is upheld comprehensively, rather than being limited to just communication protocols. It empowers personal injury lawyers to pursue justice for clients harmed by chemical exposure, even when basic information about the hazard was technically provided.