A contractor's IIPP must identify a person responsible for implementing the program. What is this requirement intended to ensure?
Explanation
Section 3203(a)(1) requires the programme to identify the person or persons with authority AND responsibility for implementing it, and both words carry weight: authority without responsibility produces a figurehead, and responsibility without authority produces someone who can see the hazard and cannot spend the money to fix it. Option (a) is the most tempting wrong answer because the qualifying individual under Business and Professions Code section 7068 really is a named person tied to the licence - but that is a trade-competence role, and nothing requires the same person to run the safety programme. Nothing in section 3203 calls for an outside reviewer (c), and the Division never approves a programme in advance (d); it reads the programme during an inspection and cites what is missing.
Law Reference: 8 CCR §3203(a)(1); B&P §7068This topic, taught in full in the CSLB Law & Business guide. CSLB Law & Business — Complete Study Guide (2026) — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 · 14-day refund →
Practice all 1632 questions free — no signup required.
Own the complete CSLB Law & Business guide — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 →
Related questions on this topic
- An employee on a contractor's job site suffers a serious injury that requires hospitalization. Within how many hours must the employer report it to Cal/OSHA?
- Which of the following is NOT a required element of a written Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP)?
- Under the IIPP standard, when must an employer provide safety training to employees?
- Cal/OSHA classifies a violation as "general" when it:
- A contractor is cited by Cal/OSHA for the same violation it was cited for two years earlier. This is most likely classified as a:
- A worker on a job site finds a container of solvent with no label. Under the Hazard Communication Standard, what should the worker do?
Last reviewed: · editorial process