Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 618 - OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 618.295 (2026)

Regulations and standards; medical examination for exposure to hazard

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 618.295  Regulations and standards; medical examination for exposure to hazard.

      1.  The Division shall adopt such regulations as are necessary to provide safe and healthful employment in those employments within its jurisdiction.

      2.  The Division shall not propose standards or regulations for products distributed or used in interstate commerce which are different from federal standards for such products unless such standards are required by compelling local conditions and do not unduly burden interstate commerce.

      3.  The Division may adopt by emergency regulation temporary emergency standards for the protection of employees who are exposed to grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful or from new hazards.

      4.  Standards established under this chapter must apply equally to all places of employment.

      5.  Standards or regulations must provide for furnishing prompt information to employees by means of labels or warning signs regarding hazards in the workplace. The information must include the suitable precautions, the symptoms and emergency treatment in case of exposure to hazards.

      6.  If an employee has been exposed to a hazard and the Division considers a medical examination necessary, the cost of the examination must be paid by the employer. The results of the examination must be furnished only to the Division and, at the request of the employee, to the employee’s physician.

      7.  Standards or regulations must prescribe the use of suitable protective equipment and control methods or procedures to include monitoring or measuring any exposures. The employees are entitled to be apprised of such monitoring and to obtain the results.

      8.  All federal occupational safety and health standards which the Secretary of Labor promulgates, modifies or revokes, and any amendments thereto, shall be deemed Nevada occupational safety and health standards unless the Division, in accordance with federal law, adopts regulations establishing alternative standards that provide protection equal to the protection provided by those federal occupational safety and health standards.

      (Added to NRS by 1973, 1012; A 1975, 766; 1977, 85; 1981, 1507; 1995, 1890)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2006–2019 · leading case: Century Steel, Inc. v. State, Div. of Indus. Relations, Occupational Saf. & Health Section, 137 P.3d 1155 (Nev. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Century Steel, Inc. v. State, Div. of Indus. Relations, Occupational Saf. & Health Section, 137 P.3d 1155 (Nev. 2006). “Violations are categorized as nonserious, serious, or willful/repeated.”
Original Roofing Co. v. Chief Admin. of the Occupational Saf. & Health Admin., 442 P.3d 146 (Nev. 2019). “NRS 618.295(8). The violation was classified as "repeat-serious" because TORC had been previously cited for similar violations in January 2012 and July 2013 (committed by different supervisors and employees than those in the underlying violation) and serious injuries are likely…”
The Original Roofing Co., LLC Vs. Chief Admin. Officer of the Occupational Saf. & Health Admin., 2019 NV 18 (Nev. 2019). · cites it 2× “NRS 618.295(8). 2The violation was classified as "repeat-serious" because TORC had been previously cited for similar violations in January 2012 and July 2013 (committed by different supervisors and employees than those in the underlying violation) and serious injuries are likely…”
Terra Contracting, Inc. v. Chief Admin. Officer of the Occup. Saf. & Health Admin. (Nev. 2016). “Generally, 1 NRS618.295(8) provides that the federal regulations apply, as Nevada has not adopted an alternative standard.”
The Original Roofing Co., LLC Vs. Chief Admin. Officer of the Occupational Saf. & Health Admin., 2019 NV 18 (Nev. 2019). “NRS 618.295(8). 2The violation was classified as "repeat-serious" because TORC had been previously cited for similar violations in January 2012 and July 2013 (committed by different supervisors and employees than those in the underlying violation) and serious injuries are likely…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 618.295(8) — 5 cases
Century Steel, Inc. v. State, Div. of Indus. Relations, Occupational Saf. & Health Section, 137 P.3d 1155 (Nev. 2006). “Violations are categorized as nonserious, serious, or willful/repeated.”
Original Roofing Co. v. Chief Admin. of the Occupational Saf. & Health Admin., 442 P.3d 146 (Nev. 2019). “NRS 618.295(8). The violation was classified as "repeat-serious" because TORC had been previously cited for similar violations in January 2012 and July 2013 (committed by different supervisors and employees than those in the underlying violation) and serious injuries are likely…”
The Original Roofing Co., LLC Vs. Chief Admin. Officer of the Occupational Saf. & Health Admin., 2019 NV 18 (Nev. 2019). “NRS 618.295(8). 2The violation was classified as "repeat-serious" because TORC had been previously cited for similar violations in January 2012 and July 2013 (committed by different supervisors and employees than those in the underlying violation) and serious injuries are likely…”
Terra Contracting, Inc. v. Chief Admin. Officer of the Occup. Saf. & Health Admin. (Nev. 2016). “Generally, 1 NRS618.295(8) provides that the federal regulations apply, as Nevada has not adopted an alternative standard.”
The Original Roofing Co., LLC Vs. Chief Admin. Officer of the Occupational Saf. & Health Admin., 2019 NV 18 (Nev. 2019). “NRS 618.295(8). 2The violation was classified as "repeat-serious" because TORC had been previously cited for similar violations in January 2012 and July 2013 (committed by different supervisors and employees than those in the underlying violation) and serious injuries are likely…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.