AIHA & ACGIH Information FAQs

AIHA and ACGIH are evaluating a potential organizational integration intended to strengthen support for the occupational and environmental health and safety profession. Under the current proposed concept, ACGIH and the AIHA Guideline Foundation would remain distinct scientific programs while receiving coordinated organizational and administrative support.

The proposed approach is intended to preserve the identity, scientific work, and legacy of each program while improving long-term sustainability, collaboration, and service to members and the broader profession. The structure, governance documents, and operating arrangements remain under review, and no final transaction has been approved.

Both organizations see significant changes affecting the profession, including an evolving workforce, growing demands on volunteers and scientific contributors, increasing operating costs, and the need to sustain trusted scientific guidance over the long term.

The organizations also serve overlapping communities and compete for many of the same members, volunteers, sponsors, resources, and attention. The Boards are evaluating whether closer coordination could reduce unnecessary duplication, direct more resources toward scientific and member programs, and create a stronger platform for the future.

This discussion is not being driven by an immediate financial crisis. It is a strategic evaluation being undertaken while both organizations can consider options carefully and deliberately.

No. The potential integration remains under review. Due diligence, legal review, governance development, financial and operational analysis, and Board consideration are continuing.

Both Boards must evaluate and approve any final arrangements. Timing and terms may change as additional information is considered. Confirmed decisions will be communicated separately from proposals that remain under development.

AIHA and ACGIH will continue operating separately through the remainder of 2026. If the organizations decide to proceed, integration will not occur until the first half of 2027.

Before that can happen, the organizations must complete due diligence, approve the governance and operating framework, finalize legal agreements, and develop transition plans for scientific programs, membership, technology, finances, employees, communications, and other operations. The schedule remains subject to Board decisions and the outcome of this work.

Yes. AIHA and ACGIH members should renew their memberships and continue purchasing and participating in the programs, products, education, publications, and communities they value.

The organizations will remain separate through the remainder of 2026 and will continue delivering their respective benefits and fulfilling commitments associated with memberships and purchases. If an integration occurs, members will receive information about how their existing memberships and benefits will be fulfilled during the transition.

Members will not be charged an additional membership fee at the time of a transition. Members who belong to both organizations will receive additional benefits during 2027 and would pay dues to one organization for 2028 renewals.

The long-term dues structure, membership categories, and benefit packages have not yet been finalized. Affordability and the impact on members who currently belong to one, or both, organizations are important considerations in that work.

Not at this time. Current memberships and benefits remain separate through the remainder of 2026. AIHA members continue to receive AIHA benefits, and ACGIH members continue to receive ACGIH benefits.

No final decisions have been made about future access to the TLV book, publications, education, discounts, or other products. Those topics are part of membership, financial, technology, and operating work now underway.

The intended outcome is to provide members with broader access to expertise, professional resources, education, scientific programs, and opportunities to participate in the OEHS community.

A coordinated organization will reduce administrative duplication and direct more capacity toward member value, scientific committees, publications, professional development, and the long-term needs of the profession. Specific benefits, access arrangements, and pricing have not yet been finalized.

The potential integration is designed to evaluate how shared administrative capacity, reduced duplication, and more coordinated use of resources will provide sustainable support for scientific programs, publications, education, and member services.

ACGIH remains operational and continues delivering its programs, products, publications, and education. ACGIH leadership has also explained that recent financial stability has depended significantly on careful expense management and cost reductions, while membership has remained relatively flat and sales of key publications have not kept pace with increasing operating costs and inflation.

Detailed budgets, resource allocations, reporting arrangements, and long-term pricing decisions remain under review.

The concept being evaluated is broader than a one-time or recurring financial contribution. The organizations are considering how a coordinated structure will strengthen long-term scientific sustainability, governance continuity, administrative support, and member value while preserving scientific independence.

Members have suggested alternative approaches, including financial support without organizational integration. Those suggestions are part of the feedback available to leadership and will be considered through due diligence and Board review.

Worker and community health remain central to the missions and scientific programs of AIHA and ACGIH. The proposed framework is intended to sustain trusted exposure guidance and scientific work while strengthening the organizational support available to those programs.

The objective is to help practitioners, employers, governments, researchers, and others continue to access credible scientific and professional resources that support healthier workplaces and communities.

Expanding the future pipeline of OEHS professionals is an important consideration in this work. A more coordinated organization could create opportunities to connect scientific expertise, education, volunteer involvement, professional communities, and career development.

Specific programs and benefits for students and early-career professionals have not yet been finalized. Member suggestions in this area will be considered during the membership and program-planning work.

Protecting scientific independence, credibility, and rigor is a guiding principle of this process. The governance and operating documents under development are intended to define scientific and technical authority, committee autonomy, conflict of interest protections, and the boundary between scientific decision making and organizational fiduciary oversight.

The goal is to establish safeguards in governing documents so that they are durable and do not depend on individuals or future leaders. The detailed language is still being reviewed.

Confidence in scientific guidance depends on objective technical decision-making and effective management of actual or perceived conflicts of interest. The proposed governance and operating framework are being developed to define protected scientific authority, oversight boundaries, committee responsibilities, and conflict protections.

Detailed procedures have not yet been finalized. The organizations are evaluating how these protections can be documented clearly and maintained over time.

The proposed model is intended to preserve AIHA, ACGIH, and the Guideline Foundation's program identities and scientific work. ACGIH programs, including TLVs and BEIs, would continue under the ACGIH identity. Guideline Foundation programs, including OELs and ERPGs, would continue under the Guideline Foundation.

A name is also being considered for the proposed parent scientific entity. No final name has been selected. Legal, trademark, brand, international, regulatory, and communications implications are being considered as part of that decision.

Under current discussions, the TLV, OEL, ERPG, and other scientific committees will not be combined nor eliminated. The proposed governance documents are designed to define committee authority and protect scientific and technical decision-making.

Any future changes to committee structures or responsibilities would need to be evaluated through the approved governance process and against the commitment to scientific independence, technical rigor, and program continuity.

The proposed governance structure is still being developed. The work includes consideration of Board composition, representation during the transition, terms of service, officer and staff roles, committee autonomy, delegated and reserved authority, fiduciary responsibilities, reporting, and escalation processes.

The goal is to provide meaningful continuity and representation while establishing clear accountability and protecting scientific decision-making. Governance details will remain proposals until formally approved by the appropriate Boards.

The organizations recognize that ACGIH and its scientific guidance are referenced and relied upon by governmental bodies, employers, practitioners, researchers, and other institutions in the United States and internationally.

Legal, regulatory, trademark, naming, and communications implications are being reviewed as part of the due diligence process. The proposed model is intended to preserve the ACGIH identity and the continuity of its scientific programs.

That concern is being considered as part of the governance and operating review. The proposed bylaws and operating arrangements are being evaluated for clarity, workability, role boundaries, decision authority, reporting, and escalation.

The objective is to provide appropriate accountability and safeguards without creating unnecessary processes, duplicated responsibilities, or overlapping authority.

The final approval process is still being confirmed through governance and legal review. The Boards of both organizations are responsible for evaluating the proposed arrangement and taking any actions required under their governing documents and applicable law.

Member feedback is being reviewed to identify recurring questions, concerns, proposed safeguards, and alternatives that require additional analysis. Major themes include scientific independence, conflicts of interest, organizational identity, governance representation, dues and benefits, committee continuity, employee implications, affordability, and transparency.

Feedback continues to inform due diligence, governance and operating document development, Board discussions, member communications, future town halls, and updates to this FAQ. Not every suggestion will necessarily become part of the final model. The issues raised are being incorporated into the organizations' evaluation.