Read Time: 9 min
Official guidance on EM 385-1-1 can be sparse, leaving SSHOs to make judgment calls on ambiguous provisions. Here's how to interpret the new standards and apply them practically in the field.
Unlike OSHA standards, EM 385-1-1 doesn't come with a detailed preamble explaining every provision or an official interpretation database answering every question. What you have is the manual, your training, and sometimes verbal guidance from a QAR — which can vary by district. Learning to interpret the standards consistently and defensibly is a core SSHO skill.
EM 385-1-1 itself provides the framework, but interpretation often comes from multiple sources: official USACE policy letters, district-specific guidance, industry standards that are incorporated by reference, and established field practices that have been accepted across multiple projects.
The 2024 revision attempted to reduce ambiguity by clarifying some provisions that were previously unclear. However, every SSHOs still encounters situations where the manual doesn't give a direct answer — and that's where interpretation skills become critical.
When in doubt, document your interpretation and reasoning. If you make a judgment call on a specific application, write it down in your safety documentation. This protects you and provides a defensible record if the interpretation is ever questioned.
1. Follow the hierarchy of controls. When a provision allows multiple approaches, default to the most protective option. EM 385-1-1 consistently prioritizes elimination and engineering controls over administrative measures and PPE.
2. Consider incorporated standards. Many EM 385-1-1 provisions reference external standards (ANSI, ASTM, OSHA, etc.). When the manual refers to another standard, that standard becomes part of the requirement.
3. Look for the minimum — then exceed it. The manual establishes minimum requirements. Meeting the bare minimum keeps you compliant, but exceeding it demonstrates genuine safety commitment and often results in fewer field issues.
4. Check both the general and specific provisions. Some requirements appear in general sections, and additional requirements apply to specific activities. Always check both the general provisions and the specific activity requirements.
5. Consult with your contracting officer representative. For anything that could significantly impact schedule, cost, or safety, loop in the COR early. Getting verbal agreement in writing (email) provides protection if the interpretation is later challenged.
SSHO Competency Verification: The 2024 manual emphasizes competency over simple training completion. How you verify competency for specific tasks is left somewhat open — you need to establish objective criteria and document the verification process.
CE-SOHMS Implementation: The new management system requirements are prescriptive about outcomes but flexible on implementation methods. This creates opportunity but also ambiguity about what constitutes adequate compliance.
Drone Operations: Chapter 33 establishes FAA pilot certification requirements, but the USACE-specific operational requirements (documentation, approval processes, operational limitations) still require interpretation based on project-specific guidance.
Dual Contract Compliance: For projects governed by the 2014 manual alongside 2024 projects, interpreting which version applies to specific situations requires careful tracking and clear documentation.
Develop a personal or company reference system that documents how you interpret key provisions. This can take the form of annotated copies of the manual, written interpretations for commonly encountered situations, and records of any verbal guidance received from QARs or CORs.
Share these interpretations with your team. Consistency in application across your workforce reduces confusion, improves compliance, and makes safety documentation easier to manage.
Our training includes practical interpretation guidance for the most common field situations.
Contact Us to Get Started