|
U.S. Department of Labor | |
||||
| Occupational Safety & Health Administration | ||||||
 |
|
OSHA Recordkeeping Handbook
The Regulation and Related Interpretations for Recording
and Reporting Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Occupational Safety and Health Administration
U.S. Department of Labor Directorate of Evaluation and Analysis Office of Statistical Analysis OSHA 3245-01R 2005  www.OSHA.gov Employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace for their employees. OSHA's role is to assure the safety and health of America's workers by setting and enforcing standards; providing training, outreach and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging continual improvement in workplace safety and health. For more information, visit www.osha.gov. This handbook provides a general overview of a particular topic related to OSHA regulation. It does not alter or determine compliance responsibilites in OSHA standards or the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. Because interpretations and enforcement policy may change over time, you should consult current OSHA administrative interpretations and decisions by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and the Courts for additional guidance on OSHA compliance requirements. This publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced, fully or partially, without permission. Source credit is requested but not required. This information is available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202)693-1999; teletypewriter (TTY) number: (877) 889-5627. Introduction
This OSHA Web-based Recordkeeping Handbook is a compendium of existing agency-approved recordkeeping materials, including the regulatory text from the 2001 final rule on Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements (“the Recordkeeping rule”) and relevant explanatory excerpts from the preamble to the rule; chapter 5 of the agency's Recordkeeping Policies and Procedures Manual; Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs); and OSHA letters of interpretation. This Web-based handbook is intended to be a resource for businesses of all sizes, as well as OSHA's compliance safety and health officers, compliance assistance specialists, and OSHA State-plans. The information in the handbook is accessible by means of a user-friendly search engine that relies on simple point-and-click technology. The handbook is designed to answer recordkeeping questions raised
by employers, employees, and members of the OSHA family who are familiar with the basic requirements of the rule but wish to obtain additional information on specific recordkeeping issues. Users will also find the handbook useful as a research and training tool. The handbook can be accessed through the link below, which directs users to the file. Because the handbook is Webbased, it will be possible to update letters of interpretation and add FAQs to the file quickly as new questions about the rule are raised.
Preface The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) requires covered employers to prepare and maintain records of occupational injuries and illnesses. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the U.S. Department of Labor is responsible for administering the recordkeeping system established by the Act. The OSH Act and recordkeeping regulations in 29 CFR 1904 and 1952 provide specific recording and reporting requirements which comprise the framework for the nationwide occupational safety and health recording system. Under this system, it is essential that data recorded by employers be uniform and accurate to assure the consistency and validity of the statistical data which is used by OSHA for many purposes, including inspection targeting, performance measurement under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), standards development, resource allocation, Voluntary Protection Program (VPP) eligibility, and "low-hazard" industry exemptions. The data also aid employers, employees and compliance officers in analyzing the safety and health environment at the employer's establishment and is the source of information for the OSHA Data Initiative (ODI) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS) Annual Survey. In January 2001, OSHA issued a final rule revising the § 1904 and § 1952 Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements (Recordkeeping) regulations, the first revision since 1978. The goals of the revision were to simplify the system, clarify ongoing concepts, produce more useful information and better utilize modern technology. The new regulation took effect on January 1, 2002. As part of OSHA's extended outreach efforts, the agency also produced Recordkeeping Policies and Procedures Manual (CPL 2-0.135, revised December 30, 2004), which contained, along with other related information, a variety of Frequently Asked Questions. In addition, in 2002, a detailed Injury and Illness Recordkeeping website was established containing links to helpful resources related to Recordkeeping, including training presentations, applicable Federal Register notices, and OSHA's recordkeeping-related Letters of Interpretation. (See www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/index.html). This publication brings together relevant information from the Recordkeeping rule, the policies and procedures manual and the website. It is organized by regulatory section and contains the specific final regulatory language, selected excerpts from the relevant OSHA decision analysis contained in the preamble to the final rule, along with recordkeeping-related Frequently Asked Questions and OSHA's enforcement guidance presented in the agency's Letters of Interpretation. The user will find this information useful in understanding the Recordkeeping requirements and will be able to easily locate a variety of specific and necessary information pertaining to each section of the rule. The information included here deals only with the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and Parts 1904 and 1952 of Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, for recording and reporting occupational injuries and illnesses. Some employers may be subject to additional recordkeeping and reporting requirements not covered in this document. Many specific OSHA standards and regulations have additional requirements for the maintenance and retention of records for medical surveillance, exposure monitoring, inspections, and other activities and incidents relevant to occupational safety and health, and for the reporting of certain information to employees and to OSHA. For information on these requirements, which are not covered in this publication, employers should refer directly to the OSHA standards or regulations, consult OSHA's website for additional information (www.osha.gov), or contact their OSHA regional office or participating State agency. For recordkeeping and reporting questions not covered in this publication, employers may contact their OSHA regional office or the participating State agency serving their jurisdiction. Contents
Recordkeeping Handbook Roadmap Section 1904.0 Purpose REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.1 Partial exemption for employers with 10 or fewer employees REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.2 Partial exemption for establishments in certain industries REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.3 Keeping records for more than one agency REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.4 Recording criteria REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.5 Determination of work-relatedness REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.6 Determination of new cases REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.7 General recording criteria REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.8 Recording criteria for needlestick and sharps injuries REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.9 Recording criteria for cases involving medical removal under OSHA standards REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.10 Recording criteria for cases involving occupational hearing loss REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.11 Recording criteria for work-related tuberculosis cases REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.12 Recording criteria for cases involving work-related musculoskeletal disorders Sections 1904.12 - 1904.28 (Reserved) Section 1904.29 Forms REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.30 Multiple business establishments REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.31 Covered employees REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.32 Annual summary REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.33 Retention and updating REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.34 Change in business ownership REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.35 Employee involvement REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.36 Prohibition against discrimination REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.37 State recordkeeping regulations REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.38 Variances from the recordkeeping rule REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.39 Reporting fatalities and multiple hospitalization incidents to OSHA REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.40 Providing records to government representatives REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.41 Annual OSHA injury and illness survey of ten or more employers REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.42 Requests from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for data REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1904.46 Definitions REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Section 1952.4 Injury and illness recording and reporting requirements REGULATION PREAMBLE DISCUSSION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION Recordkeeping Handbook Roadmap This roadmap will assist readers in locating regulatory language, decision analyses, frequently asked questions and enforcement guidance letters concerning sections 1904 and 1952 of the OSHA Recordkeeping regulations. Purpose of Rule: See 1904.0 Exempt Employers: See 1904.1 Exempt Establishments: See 1904.2 Requirements of More Than One Agency: See 1904.3 Which Injuries to Record: See 1904.4 1904.5 1904.6 1904.7 Which Injuries are Work-related: See 1904.5 When an Injury Represents a New Case: See 1904.6 Needlestick and Sharps Injuries: See 1904.8 Medical Removal Cases: See 1904.9 Hearing Loss Cases: See 1904.10 Tuberculosis Cases: See 1904.11 Musculoskeletal Disorder Cases: See 1904.12 The Recording Forms: See 1904.29 Multiple Business Establishments: See 1904.30 Employee Coverage: See 1904.31 The Annual Summary: See 1904.32 Records Retention and Updating: See 1904.33 Changes in Business Ownership: See 1904.34 Employee Involvement: See 1904.35 Prohibition Against Discrimination: See 1904.36 State Recordkeeping Regulations: See 1904.37 Variances from the Rule: See 1904.38 Fatality/Multiple Hospitalization Requirements: See 1904.39 Providing Records to Government Representatives: See 1904.40 OSHA's Annual Injury/Illness Survey: See 1904.41 Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Requests: See 1904.42 Definitions: See 1904.46 State-plan State Requirements: See 1952.4 Section 1904.0 Purpose (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) REGULATION: Section 1904.0 Subpart A - Purpose (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) Section 1904.0 The purpose of this rule (Part 1904) is to require employers to record and report work-related fatalities, injuries and illnesses. Note to Section 1904.0: Recording or reporting a work-related injury, illness, or fatality does not mean that the employer or employee was at fault, that an OSHA rule has been violated, or that the employee is eligible for workers' compensation or other benefits. PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.0 (66 FR 5933-5935, Jan. 19, 2001) The following are selected excerpts from the preamble to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements, the Recordkeeping rule (66 FR 5916, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). These excerpts represent some of the key discussions related to the final rule (66 FR 6122, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). Subpart A. Purpose The Purpose section of the final rule explains why OSHA is promulgating this rule. The Purpose section contains no regulatory requirements and is intended merely to provide information. A Note to this section informs employers and employees that recording a case on the OSHA recordkeeping forms does not indicate either that the employer or the employee was at fault in the incident or that an OSHA rule has been violated. Recording an injury or illness on the Log also does not, in and of itself, indicate that the case qualifies for workers' compensation or other benefits. Although any specific work-related injury or illness may involve some or all of these factors, the record made of that injury or illness on the OSHA recordkeeping forms only shows three things: (1) that an injury or illness has occurred; (2) that the employer has determined that the case is work-related (using OSHA's definition of that term); and (3) that the case is non-minor, i.e., that it meets one or more of the OSHA injury and illness recording criteria.... Many cases that are recorded in the OSHA system are also compensable under the State workers' compensation system, but many others are not. However, the two systems have different purposes and scopes. The OSHA recordkeeping system is intended to collect, compile and analyze uniform and consistent nationwide data on occupational injuries and illnesses. The workers' compensation system, in contrast, is not designed primarily to generate and collect data but is intended primarily to provide medical coverage and compensation for workers who are killed, injured or made ill at work, and varies in coverage from one State to another.... As a result of these differences between the two systems, recording a case does not mean that the case is compensable, or vice versa. When an injury or illness occurs to an employee, the employer must independently analyze the case in light of both the OSHA recording criteria and the requirements of the State workers' compensation system to determine whether the case is recordable or compensable, or both.... FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.0 (OSHA Instruction, CPL 2-00.135, Chap. 5) Section 1904.0 Purpose Question 0-1. Why are employers required to keep records of work-related injuries and illnesses? The OSH Act of 1970 requires the Secretary of Labor to produce regulations that require employers to keep records of occupational deaths, injuries, and illnesses. The records are used for several purposes. Injury and illness statistics are used by OSHA. OSHA collects data through the OSHA Data Initiative (ODI) to help direct its programs and measure its own performance. Inspectors also use the data during inspections to help direct their efforts to the hazards that are hurting workers. The records are also used by employers and employees to implement safety and health programs at individual workplaces. Analysis of the data is a widely recognized method for discovering workplace safety and health problems and for tracking progress in solving those problems. The records provide the base data for the BLS Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, the Nation's primary source of occupational injury and illness data. Question 0-2. What is the effect of workers' compensation reports on the OSHA records? The purpose section of the rule includes a note to make it clear that recording an injury or illness neither affects a person's entitlement to workers' compensation nor proves a violation of an OSHA rule. The rules for compensability under workers' compensation differ from state to state and do not have any effect on whether or not a case needs to be recorded on the OSHA 300 Log. Many cases will be OSHA recordable and compensable under workers' compensation. However, some cases will be compensable but not OSHA recordable, and some cases will be OSHA recordable but not compensable under workers' compensation. LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section 1904.0 Section 1904.0 Purpose This section will be developed as letters of interpretation become available. Section 1904.1 Partial exemption for employers with 10 or fewer employees (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) REGULATION: Section 1904.1 Subpart B - Scope (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) Note to Subpart B: All employers covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) are covered by these Part 1904 regulations. However, most employers do not have to keep OSHA injury and illness records unless OSHA or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) informs them in writing that they must keep records. For example, employers with 10 or fewer employees and business establishments in certain industry classifications are partially exempt from keeping OSHA injury and illness records. Section 1904.1 Partial exemption for employers with 10 or fewer employees (a) Basic requirement. (1) If your company had ten (10) or fewer employees at all times during the last calendar year, you do not need to keep OSHA injury and illness records unless OSHA or the BLS informs you in writing that you must keep records under Section 1904.41 or Section 1904.42. However, as required by Section 1904.39, all employers covered by the OSH Act must report to OSHA any workplace incident that results in a fatality or the hospitalization of three or more employees. (2) If your company had more than ten (10) employees at any time during the last calendar year, you must keep OSHA injury and illness records unless your establishment is classified as a partially exempt industry under Section 1904.2. (b) Implementation. (1) Is the partial exemption for size based on the size of my entire company or on the size of an individual business establishment? The partial exemption for size is based on the number of employees in the entire company. (2) How do I determine the size of my company to find out if I qualify for the partial exemption for size? To determine if you are exempt because of size, you need to determine your company's peak employment during the last calendar year. If you had no more than 10 employees at any time in the last calendar year, your company qualifies for the partial exemption for size. PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.1 (66 FR 5935-5939, Jan. 19, 2001) The following are selected excerpts from the preamble to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements, the Recordkeeping rule (66 FR 5916, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). These excerpts represent some of the key discussions related to the final rule (66 FR 6122, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). Section 1904.1 Partial exemption for employers with 10 or fewer employees The Size-Based Exemption in the Former Rule The original OSHA injury and illness recording and reporting rule issued in July 1971 required all employers covered by the OSH Act to maintain injury and illness records. In October 1972, an exemption from most of the recordkeeping requirements was put in place for employers with seven or fewer employees. In 1977, OSHA amended the rule to exempt employers with 10 or fewer employees, and that exemption has continued in effect to this day.... The Size-Based Exemption in the Final Rule ...Under the final rule (and the former rule), an employer in any industry who employed no more than 10 employees at any time during the preceding calendar year is not required to maintain OSHA records of occupational illnesses and injuries during the current year unless requested to do so in writing by OSHA (under Section 1904.41) or the BLS (under Section 1904.42). If an employer employed 11 or more people at a given time during the year, how-ever, that employer is not eligible for the size-based partial exemption.... ... [U]nder the 10 or fewer employee partial exemption threshold, more than 80% of employers in OSHA's jurisdiction are exempted from routinely keeping records.... ...[T]he final rule clarifies that the 10 or fewer size exemption is applicable only if the employer had fewer than 11 employees at all times during the previous calendar year. Thus, if an employer employs 11 or more people at any given time during that year, the employer is not eligible for the small employer exemption in the following year. This total includes all workers employed by the business. All individuals who are "employees" under the OSH Act are counted in the total; the count includes all full time, part time, temporary, and seasonal employees. For businesses that are sole proprietorships or partnerships, the owners and partners would not be considered employees and would not be counted. Similarly, for family farms, family members are not counted as employees. However, in a corporation, corporate officers who receive payment for their services are considered employees. [See Section 1904.31, Covered Employees.] Consistent with the former rule, the final rule applies the size exemption based on the total number of employees in the firm, rather than the number of employees at any particular location or establishment...because the resources available in a given business depend on the size of the firm as a whole, not on the size of individual establishments owned by the firm. In addition, the analysis of injury records should be of value to the firm as a whole, regardless of the size of individual establishments. Further, an exemption based on individual establishments would be difficult to administer, especially in cases where an individual employee, such as a maintenance worker, regularly reports to work at several establishments. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.1 (OSHA Instruction, CPL 2-00.135, Chap. 5) Section 1904.1 Partial exemption for employers with 10 or fewer employees This section will be developed as questions and answers become available. LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section 1904.1 Section 1904.1 Partial exemption for employers with 10 or fewer employees This section will be developed as letters of interpretation become available. Section 1904.2 Partial exemption for establishments in certain industries (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) REGULATION: Section 1904.2 Subpart B - Scope (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) Section 1904.2 Partial exemption for establishments in certain industries (a) Basic requirement. (1) If your business establishment is classified in a specific low hazard retail, service, finance, insurance or real estate industry listed in Appendix A to this Subpart B, you do not need to keep OSHA injury and illness records unless the government asks you to keep the records under Section 1904.41 or Section 1904.42. However, all employers must report to OSHA any workplace incident that results in a fatality or the hospitalization of three or more employees (see Section 1904.39). (2) If one or more of your company's establishments are classified in a non-exempt industry, you must keep OSHA injury and illness records for all of such establishments unless your company is partially exempted because of size under Section 1904.1. (b) Implementation. (1) Does the partial industry classification exemption apply only to business establishments in the retail, services, finance, insurance or real estate industries (SICs 52-89)? Yes, business establishments classified in agriculture; mining; construction; manufacturing; transportation; communication; electric, gas and sanitary services; or wholesale trade are not eligible for the partial industry classification exemption. (2) Is the partial industry classification exemption based on the industry classification of my entire company or on the classification of individual business establishments operated by my company? The partial industry classification exemption applies to individual business establishments. If a company has several business establishments engaged in different classes of business activities, some of the company's establishments may be required to keep records, while others may be exempt. (3) How do I determine the Standard Industrial Classification code for my company or for individual establishments? You determine your Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code by using the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. You may contact your nearest OSHA office or State agency for help in determining your SIC. Non-Mandatory Appendix A to Subpart B - Partially Exempt Industries Employers are not required to keep OSHA injury and illness records for any establishment classified in the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes, unless they are asked in writing to do so by OSHA, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), or a state agency operating under the authority of OSHA or the BLS. All employers, including those partially exempted by reason of company size or industry classification, must report to OSHA any workplace incident that results in a fatality or the hospitalization of three or more employees (see Section 1904.39). Appendix A -- Partially Exempt Industries
PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.2 (66 FR 5939-5945, Jan. 19, 2001) The following are selected excerpts from the preamble to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements, the Recordkeeping rule (66 FR 5916, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). These excerpts represent some of the key discussions related to the final rule (66 FR 6122, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). Section 1904.2 Partial exemption for establishments in certain industries Section 1904.2 of the final rule partially exempts employers with establishments classified in certain lower-hazard industries. Lower-hazard industries are those Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code industries within SICs 52-89 that have an average Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred (DART) rate at or below 75% of the national average DART rate. You determine your Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code by using the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. You may contact your nearest OSHA office or State agency for help in determining your SIC. Employers with establishments in those industry sectors shown in Appendix A are not required routinely to keep OSHA records for their establishments. They must, however, keep records if requested to do so by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in connection with its Annual Survey (section 1904.42) or by OSHA in connection with its Data Initiative (section 1904.41). In addition, all employers covered by the OSH Act must report a work-related fatality, or an accident that results in the hospitalization of three or more employees, to OSHA within 8 hours (section 1904.39). In 1982, OSHA exempted establishments in a number of service, finance and retail industries from the duty to regularly maintain the OSHA Log and Incident Report (47 FR 57699 (Dec. 28, 1982)). This industry exemption to the Part 1904 rule was intended to "reduce paperwork burden on employers without compromising worker safety and health."... Although the 1982 Federal Register notice discussed the possibility of revising the exempt industry list on a routine basis, the list of partially exempt industries compiled in 1982 has remained unchanged until this revision of the Part 1904 rule.... ...[N]on-mandatory Appendix A of the final rule identifies industries for exemption at the 3-digit SIC code level. Although this approach does make the list of exempt industries longer and more detailed, it also targets the exemption more effectively than did the former rule's list. For example, the final rule does not exempt firms in many of the more hazardous 3-digit SIC industries that are embedded within lower rate 2-digit SIC industries. It does, however, exempt firms in relatively low-hazard 3-digit SIC industries, even though they are classified in higher hazard 2-digit SIC industries. Where Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred (DART, formerly LWDI) rate calculations exempt all of the 3-digit SIC industries within a given 2-digit industry, the exempt industry list in Appendix A displays only the 2-digit SIC classification. This approach merely provides a shorter, simpler list. For multi-establishment firms, the industry exemption is based on the SIC code of each establishment, rather than the industrial classification of a firm as a whole. For example, some larger corporations have establishments that engage in different business activities. Where this is the case, each establishment could fall into a different SIC code, based on its business activity. The Standard Industrial Classification manual states that the establishment, rather than the firm, is the appropriate unit for determining the SIC code. Thus, depending on the SIC code of the establishment, one establishment of a firm may be exempt from routine recordkeeping under Part 1904, while another establishment in the same company may not be exempt.... OSHA has evaluated other approaches but has decided that the 3-digit DART rate method is both simpler and more equitable than the former 2-digit method. By exempting lower-hazard industry sectors within SICs 52-89, OSHA hopes both to concentrate its recordkeeping requirements in sectors that will provide the most useful data and to minimize paperwork burden. No exemption method is perfect: any method that exempts broad classes of employers from recordkeeping obligations will exempt some more hazardous workplaces and cover some less hazardous workplaces. OSHA has attempted to minimize both of these problems by using the most current injury and illness statistics available, and by applying them to a more detailed industry level within the retail, financial and service sectors than was formerly the case. OSHA has also limited the scope of the exemptions by using an exemption threshold that is well below the national average, including only those industries that have average DART rates that are at or below 75% of the national average DART rate. The rule also limits the exempt industries to the retail, financial and service sectors, which are generally less hazardous than the manufacturing industry sector.... The final rule makes clear that, when a "leased" or "temporary" employee is supervised on a day-to-day basis by the using firm, the using firm must enter that employee's injuries and illnesses on the using firm's establishment Log and other records. Injuries and illnesses occurring to a given employee should only be recorded once, either by the temporary staffing firm or the using firm, depending on which firm actually supervises the temporary employees on a day-to-day basis. (see the discussion for Section 1904.31, Covered employees, for an in-depth explanation of these requirements.)... After a review of the recent BLS data, OSHA's own experience, and the record of this rulemaking, OSHA has decided that it is appropriate to require firms in industries within the SIC 01 through 51 codes to comply with OSHA's requirements to keep records. Thus, the final rule, like the proposed rule and the rule published in 1982, does not exempt firms with more than 10 employees in the industry divisions of agriculture, mining, construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, transportation and public utilities (SICs 01-52) from routine recordkeeping. Although OSHA no longer restricts its inspection targeting schemes to employers in these SICs, these industries have traditionally been, and continue to be, the focus of many of the Agency's enforcement programs. OSHA believes that it is important for larger employers (i.e., those with more than 10 employees) in these industries to continue to collect and maintain injury and illness records for use by the employer, employees and the government. As noted in the comments there is a wide variation in injury/illness rates among establishments classified in these industries. Further, as a whole, these industries continue to have injury and illness rates that are generally higher than the private sector average and will thus benefit from the information that OSHA-mandated records can provide about safety and health conditions in the workplace. In 1998, the lost workday injury and illness rate for the entire private sector was 3.1. As can be seen in the following table of lost workday injury and illness rates by industry division, all of the covered divisions exceeded 75% of the national average LWDI rate (2.325) for the private sector as a whole, while the exempted industry divisions had substantially lower rates.
...The Agency finds that continuing, and improving on, the Agency's longstanding approach of partially exempting those industries in SIC codes 52-89 that have DART rates, based on 3 years of BLS data, below 75% of the private-sector average strikes the appropriate balance between the need for injury and illness information on the one hand, and the paperwork burdens created by recording obligations, on the other. The BLS Annual Survey will, of course, continue to provide national job-related statistics for all industries and all sizes of businesses. As it has done in the past, the BLS will sample employers in the partially exempt industries and ask each sampled employer to keep OSHA records for one year. In the following year, BLS will collect the records to generate estimates of occupational injury and illness for firms in the partially exempt industries and size classes, and combine those data with data for other industries to generate estimates for the entire U.S. private sector. These procedures ensure the integrity of the national statistics on occupational safety and health. The list of partially exempted industry sectors in this rule is based on the current (1987) revision of the SIC manual. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is charged with maintaining and revising the system of industrial classification that will replace the SIC. The new system is used by U.S. statistical agencies (including the BLS). Under the direction of OMB, the U.S. government has adopted a new, comprehensive system of industrial classification that will replace the SIC. The new system is called the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS). NAICS will harmonize the U.S. classification system with those of Canada and Mexico and make it easier to compare various economic and labor statistics among the three countries.... Although the NAIC industry classification system has been formally adopted by the United States, the individual U.S. statistical agencies (including the BLS) are still converting their statistical systems to reflect the new codes and have not begun to publish statistics using the new industry classifications. The new system will be phased into the nation's various statistical systems over the next several years. The BLS does not expect to publish the first occupational injury and illness rates under the new system until the reference year 2003. Given the lag time between the end of the year and the publication of the statistics, data for a full three-year period will not be available before December of 2006. Because data to revise the Part 1904 industry exemption based on the NAIC system will not be available for another five years, OSHA has decided to update the industry exemption list now based on the most recent SIC-based information available from BLS for the years 1996, 1997 and 1998. OSHA will conduct a future rulemaking to update the industry classifications to the NAIC system when BLS publishes injury and illness data that can be used to make appropriate industry-by-industry decisions.... OSHA agrees with those commenters who favored regular updating of the SIC code exemption list. For the list to focus Agency resources most effectively on the most hazardous industries, it must be up-to-date. Industries that are successful in lowering their rates to levels below the exemption threshold should be exempted, while those whose rates rise sufficiently to exceed the criterion should receive additional attention. Unfortunately, the change in industry coding systems from the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system to the North American Industry Classification (NAIC) system will require a future rulemaking to shift to that system. Therefore, there is no value in adding an updating mechanism at this time. The automatic updating issue will be addressed in the same future rulemaking that addresses the NAIC system conversion. Partial Exemptions for Employers Under the Jurisdiction of OSHA-Approved State Occupational Safety and Health Plans ...For those States with OSHA-approved State plans, the state is generally required to adopt Federal OSHA rules, or a State rule that is at least as effective as the Federal OSHA rule. States with approved plans do not need to exempt employers from recordkeeping, either by employer size or by industry classification, as the final Federal OSHA rule does, although they may choose to do so. For example, States with approved plans may require records from a wider universe of employers than Federal OSHA does. These States cannot exempt more industries or employers than Federal OSHA does, however, because doing so would result in a State rule that is not as effective as the Federal rule. A larger discussion of the effect on the State plans can be found in Section VIII of this preamble, State Plans. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.2 (OSHA Instruction, CPL 2-00.135, Chap. 5) Section 1904.2 Partial exemption for establishments in certain industries Question 2-1. How can I get help to find my SIC Code and determine if I'm partially exempt from the recordkeeping rule? You can access the statistics section of OSHA's internet home page, at http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/. Go to the website and choose SIC Manual and follow the directions. If you still cannot determine your SIC code, you can call an OSHA area office, or, if you are in a state with an OSHA-approved state plan, call your State Plan office. See the OSHA Office Directory. Question 2-2. Do States with OSHA-approved State plans have the same industry exemptions as Federal OSHA? States with OSHA-approved plans may require employers to keep records for the State, even though those employers are within an industry exempted by the Federal rule. Question 2-3. Do professional sports teams qualify for the partial industry exemption in section 1904.2? No. Only those industry classifications listed in Appendix A to Subpart B qualify for the partial industry exemption in section 1904.2. Professional sports teams are classified under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 794, which is not one of the listed exempt classifications. LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section 1904.2 Section 1904.2 Partial exemption for establishments in certain industries This section will be developed as letters of interpretation become available. Section 1904.3 Keeping records for more than one agency (66 FR 6123, Jan. 19, 2001) REGULATION: Section 1904.3 Subpart B - Scope (66 FR 6122, Jan. 19, 2001) Section 1904.3 Keeping records for more than one agency If you create records to comply with another government agency's injury and illness recordkeeping requirements, OSHA will consider those records as meeting OSHA's Part 1904 recordkeeping requirements if OSHA accepts the other agency's records under a memorandum of understanding with that agency, or if the other agency's records contain the same information as this Part 1904 requires you to record. You may contact your nearest OSHA office or State agency for help in determining whether your records meet OSHA's requirements. PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.3 (66 FR 5945, Jan. 19, 2001) The following are selected excerpts from the preamble to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements, the Recordkeeping rule (66 FR 5916, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). These excerpts represent some of the key discussions related to the final rule (66 FR 6122, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). Section 1904.3 Recordkeeping under the requirements of other Federal agencies Section 1904.3 of the final rule provides guidance for employers who are subject to the occupational injury and illness recording and reporting requirements of other Federal agencies. Several other Federal agencies have similar requirements, such as the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The final rule at section 1904.3 tells the employer that OSHA will accept these records in place of the employer's Part 1904 records under two circumstances: (1) if OSHA has entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with that agency that specifically accepts the other agency's records, the employer may use them in place of the OSHA records, or (2) if the other agency's records include the same information required by Part 1904, OSHA would consider them an acceptable substitute. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.3 (OSHA Instruction, CPL 2-00.135, Chap. 5) Section 1904.3 Keeping records for more than one agency This section will be developed as questions and answers become available. LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section 1904.3 Section 1904.3 Keeping records for more than one agency This section will be developed as letters of interpretation become available. Section 1904.4 Recording criteria (66 FR 6123, Jan. 19, 2001) REGULATION: Section 1904.4 Subpart C - Recordkeeping Forms and Recording Criteria (66 FR 6123, Jan. 19, 2001) Note to Subpart C: This Subpart describes the work-related injuries and illnesses that an employer must enter into the OSHA records and explains the OSHA forms that employers must use to record work-related fatalities, injuries, and illnesses. Section 1904.4 Recording criteria (a) Basic requirement. Each employer required by this Part to keep records of fatalities, injuries, and illnesses must record each fatality, injury and illness that: (1) Is work-related; and (2) Is a new case; and (3) Meets one or more of the general recording criteria of Section 1904.7 or the application to specific cases of Section 1904.8 through Section 1904.11. (b) Implementation. (1) What sections of this rule describe recording criteria for recording work-related injuries and illnesses? The table below indicates which sections of the rule address each topic. (i) Determination of work-relatedness. See Section 1904.5.(2) How do I decide whether a particular injury or illness is recordable? The decision tree for recording work-related injuries and illnesses below shows the steps involved in making this determination.
PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.4 (66 FR 5945-5946, Jan. 19, 2001) The following are selected excerpts from the preamble to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements, the Recordkeeping rule (66 FR 5916, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). These excerpts represent some of the key discussions related to the final rule (66 FR 6122, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). Section 1904.4 Recording Criteria Section 1904.4 of the final rule contains provisions mandating the recording of work-related injuries and illnesses that must be entered on the OSHA 300 (Log) and 301 (Incident Report) forms. It sets out the recording requirements that employers are required to follow in recording cases. Paragraph 1904.4(a) of the final rule mandates that each employer who is required by OSHA to keep records must record each fatality, injury or illness that is work-related, is a new case and not a continuation of an old case, and meets one or more of the general recording criteria in section 1904.7 or the additional criteria for specific cases found in sections 1904.8 through 1904.11. Paragraph (b) contains provisions implementing this basic requirement. Paragraph 1904.4(b)(1) contains a table that points employers and their recordkeepers to the various sections of the rule that determine which work-related injuries and illnesses are to be recorded. These sections lay out the requirements for determining whether an injury or illness is work-related, if it is a new case, and if it meets one or more of the general recording criteria. In addition, the table contains a row addressing the application of these and additional criteria to specific kinds of cases (needlestick and sharps injury cases, tuberculosis cases, hearing loss cases, medical removal cases, and musculoskeletal disorder cases). The table in paragraph 1904.4(b)(1) is intended to guide employers through the recording process and to act as a table of contents to the sections of Subpart C. Paragraph (b)(2) is a decision tree, or flowchart, that shows the steps involved in determining whether or not a particular injury or illness case must be recorded on the OSHA forms. It essentially reflects the same information as is in the table in paragraph 1904.4(b)(1), except that it presents this information graphically. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.4 (OSHA Instruction, CPL 2-00.135, Chap. 5) Section 1904.4 Recording criteria Question 4-1. Does an employee report of an injury or illness establish the existence of the injury or illness for recordkeeping purposes? No. In determining whether a case is recordable, the employer must first decide whether an injury or illness, as defined by the rule, has occurred. If the employer is uncertain about whether an injury or illness has occurred, the employer may refer the employee to a physician or other health care professional for evaluation and may consider the health care professional's opinion in determining whether an injury or illness exists. [Note: If a physician or other licensed health care professional diagnoses a significant injury or illness within the meaning of Section 1904.7(b)(7) and the employer determines that the case is work-related, the case must be recorded.] LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section 1904.4 Section 1904.4 Recording criteria This section will be developed as letters of interpretation become available. Section 1904.5 Determination of work-relatedness (66 FR 6123, Jan. 19, 2001) REGULATION: Section 1904.5 Subpart C - Recordkeeping Forms and Recording Criteria (66 FR 6123, Jan. 19, 2001) Note to Subpart C: This Subpart describes the work-related injuries and illnesses that an employer must enter into the OSHA records and explains the OSHA forms that employers must use to record work-related fatalities, injuries, and illnesses. Section 1904.5 Determination of work-relatedness (a) Basic requirement. You must consider an injury or illness to be work-related if an event or exposure in the work environment either caused or contributed to the resulting condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury or illness. Work-relatedness is presumed for injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures occurring in the work environment, unless an exception in Section 1904.5(b)(2) specifically applies. (b) Implementation. (1) What is the "work environment"? OSHA defines the work environment as "the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of his or her work." (2) Are there situations where an injury or illness occurs in the work environment and is not considered work-related? Yes, an injury or illness occurring in the work environment that falls under one of the following exceptions is not work-related, and therefore is not recordable.
(3) How do I handle a case if it is not obvious whether the precipitating event or exposure occurred in the work environment or occurred away from work? In these situations, you must evaluate the employee's work duties and environment to decide whether or not one or more events or exposures in the work environment either caused or contributed to the resulting condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing condition. (4) How do I know if an event or exposure in the work environment "significantly aggravated" a preexisting injury or illness? A preexisting injury or illness has been significantly aggravated, for purposes of OSHA injury and illness recordkeeping, when an event or exposure in the work environment results in any of the following: (i) Death, provided that the preexisting injury or illness would likely not have resulted in death but for the occupational event or exposure.(5) Which injuries and illnesses are considered pre-existing conditions? An injury or illness is a preexisting condition if it resulted solely from a non-work-related event or exposure that occurred outside the work environment. (6) How do I decide whether an injury or illness is work-related if the employee is on travel status at the time the injury or illness occurs? Injuries and illnesses that occur while an employee is on travel status are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities "in the interest of the employer." Examples of such activities include travel to and from customer contacts, conducting job tasks, and entertaining or being entertained to transact, discuss, or promote business (work-related entertainment includes only entertainment activities being engaged in at the direction of the employer). Injuries or illnesses that occur when the employee is on travel status do not have to be recorded if they meet one of the exceptions listed below.
(b)(7) How do I decide if a case is work-related when the employee is working at home? Injuries and illnesses that occur while an employee is working at home, including work in a home office, will be considered work-related if the injury or illness occurs while the employee is performing work for pay or compensation in the home, and the injury or illness is directly related to the performance of work rather than to the general home environment or setting. For example, if an employee drops a box of work documents and injures his or her foot, the case is considered work-related. If an employee's fingernail is punctured by a needle from a sewing machine used to perform garment work at home, becomes infected and requires medical treatment, the injury is considered work-related. If an employee is injured because he or she trips on the family dog while rushing to answer a work phone call, the case is not considered work-related. If an employee working at home is electrocuted because of faulty home wiring, the injury is not considered work-related. PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.5 (66 FR 5946-5962, Jan. 19, 2001) The following are selected excerpts from the preamble to the Occupational Injury and Illness Recording and Reporting Requirements, the Recordkeeping rule (66 FR 5916, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). These excerpts represent some of the key discussions related to the final rule (66 FR 6122, 29 CFR Parts 1904 and 1952). Section 1904.5 Determination of work-relatedness This section of the final rule sets out the requirements employers must follow in determining whether a given injury or illness is work-related. Paragraph 1904.5(a) states that an injury or illness must be considered work-related if an event or exposure in the work environment caused or contributed to the injury or illness or significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury or illness. It stipulates that, for OSHA recordkeeping purposes, work relationship is presumed for such injuries and illnesses unless an exception listed in paragraph 1904.5(b)(2) specifically applies. Implementation requirements are set forth in paragraph (b) of the final rule. Paragraph (b)(1) defines "work environment" for recordkeeping purposes and makes clear that the work environment includes the physical locations where employees are working as well as the equipment and materials used by the employee to perform work. Paragraph (b)(2) lists the exceptions to the presumption of work-relatedness permitted by the final rule; cases meeting the conditions of any of the listed exceptions are not considered work-related and are therefore not recordable in the OSHA recordkeeping system. Section 8(c)(2) of the OSH Act directs the Secretary to issue regulations requiring employers to record "work-related" injuries and illnesses. It is implicit in this wording that there must be a causal connection between the employment and the injury or illness before the case is recordable. For most types of industrial accidents involving traumatic injuries, such as amputations, fractures, burns and electrocutions, a causal connection is easily determined because the injury arises from forces, equipment, activities, or conditions inherent in the employment environment. Thus, there is general agreement that when an employee is struck by or caught in moving machinery, or is crushed in a construction cave-in, the case is work-related. It is also accepted that a variety of illnesses are associated with exposure to toxic substances, such as lead and cadmium, used in industrial processes. Accordingly, there is little question that cases of lead or cadmium poisoning are work-related if the employee is exposed to these substances at work. On the other hand, a number of injuries and illnesses that occur, or manifest themselves, at work are caused by a combination of occupational factors, such as performing job-related bending and lifting motions, and factors personal to the employee, such as the effects of a pre-existing medical condition. In many such cases, it is likely that occupational factors have played a tangible role in causing the injury or illness, but one that cannot be readily quantified as "significant" or "predominant" in comparison with the personal factors involved. Injuries and illnesses also occur at work that do not have a clear connection to a specific work activity, condition, or substance that is peculiar to the employment environment. For example, an employee may trip for no apparent reason while walking across a level factory floor; be sexually assaulted by a co-worker; or be injured accidentally as a result of an act of violence perpetrated by one co-worker against a third party. In these and similar cases, the employee's job-related tasks or exposures did not create or contribute to the risk that such an injury would occur. Instead, a causal connection is established by the fact that the injury would not have occurred but for the conditions and obligations of employment that placed the employee in the position in which he or she was injured or made ill. The final rule's test for work-relationship and its similarity to the former and proposed rules. -- The final rule requires that employers consider an injury or illness to be "work-related" if an event or exposure in the work environment either caused or contributed to the resulting condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury or illness. Work relatedness is presumed for injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures occurring in the work environment, unless an exception in Section 1904.5(b)(2) specifically applies. Under paragraph 1904.5(b)(1), the "work environment" means "the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of his or her work."... Who Makes the Determination? ...OSHA has concluded that requiring employers to rely on a health care professional for the determination of the work-relatedness of occupational injuries and illnesses would be burdensome, impractical, and unnecessary. Small employers, in particular, would be burdened by such a provision. Further, if the professional is not familiar with the injured worker's job duties and work environment, he or she will not have sufficient information to make a decision about the work-relatedness of the case. OSHA also does not agree that health care professional involvement is necessary in the overwhelming majority of cases. Employers have been making work-relatedness determinations for more than 20 years and have performed this responsibility well in that time. This does not mean that employers may not, if they choose, seek the advice of a physician or other licensed health care professional to help them understand the link between workplace factors and injuries and illnesses in particular cases; it simply means that OSHA does not believe that most employers will need to avail themselves of the services of such a professional in most cases. Accordingly, OSHA has concluded that the determination of work-relatedness is best made by the employer, as it has been in the past. Employers are in the best position to obtain the information, both from the employee and the workplace, that is necessary to make this determination. Although expert advice may occasionally be sought by employers in particularly complex cases, the final rule provides that the determination of work-relatedness ultimately rests with the employer. The Final Rule's Exceptions to the Geographic Presumption Paragraph 1904.5(b)(2) of the final rule contains eight exceptions to the work environment presumption that are intended to exclude from the recordkeeping system those injuries and illnesses that occur or manifest in the work environment, but have been identified by OSHA, based on its years of experience with recordkeeping, as cases that do not provide information useful to the identification of occupational injuries and illnesses and would thus tend to skew national injury and illness statistics. These eight exceptions are the only exceptions to the presumption permitted by the final rule. (i) Injuries or illnesses will not be considered work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was present in the work environment as a member of the general public rather than as an employee.This exception, which is codified at paragraph 1904.5(b)(2)(i), is based on the fact that no employment relationship is in place at the time an injury or illness of this type occurs. A case exemplifying this exception would occur if an employee of a retail store patronized that store as a customer on a non-work day and was injured in a fall. This exception allows the employer not to record cases that occur outside of the employment relationship when his or her establishment is also a public place and a worker happens to be using the facility as a member of the general public. In these situations, the injury or illness has nothing to do with the employee's work or the employee's status as an employee, and it would therefore be inappropriate for the recordkeeping system to capture the case.... (ii) Injuries or illnesses will not be considered work-related if they involve symptoms that surface at work but result solely from a non-work-related event or exposure that occurs outside the work environment.OSHA's recordkeeping system is intended only to capture cases that are caused by conditions or exposures arising in the work environment. It is not designed to capture cases that have no relationship with the work environment. For this exception to apply, the work environment cannot have caused, contributed to, or significantly aggravated the injury or illness. This exception is consistent with the position followed by OSHA for many years and reiterated in the final rule: that any job-related contribution to the injury or illness makes the incident work-related, and its corollary--that any injury or illness to which work makes no actual contribution is not work-related. An example of this type of injury would be a diabetic incident that occurs while an employee is working. Because no event or exposure at work contributed in any way to the diabetic incident, the case is not recordable. This exception allows the employer to exclude cases where an employee's non-work activities are the sole cause of the injury or illness.... (iii) Injuries and illnesses will not be considered work-related if they result solely from voluntary participation in a wellness program or in a medical, fitness, or recreational activity such as blood donation, physical, flu shot, exercise classes, racquetball, or baseball.This exception allows the employer to exclude certain injury or illness cases that are related to personal medical care, physical fitness activities and voluntary blood donations. The key words here are "solely" and "voluntary." The work environment cannot have contributed to the injury or illness in any way for this exception to apply, and participation in the wellness, fitness or recreational activities must be voluntary and not a condition of employment. This exception allows the employer to exclude cases that are related to personal matters of exercise, recreation, medical examinations or participation in blood donation programs when they are voluntary and are not being undertaken as a condition of work. For example, if a clerical worker was injured while performing aerobics in the company gymnasium during his or her lunch hour, the case would not be work-related. On the other hand, if an employee who was assigned to manage the gymnasium was injured while teaching an aerobics class, the injury would be work-related because the employee was working at the time of the injury and the activity was not voluntary. Similarly, if an employee suffered a severe reaction to a flu shot that was administered as part of a voluntary inoculation program, the case would not be considered work-related; however, if an employee suffered a reaction to medications administered to enable the employee to travel overseas on business, or the employee had an illness reaction to a medication administered to treat a work-related injury, the case would be considered work-related.... (iv) Injuries and illnesses will not be considered work-related if they are solely the result of an employee eating, drinking, or preparing food or drink for personal consumption (whether bought on the premises or brought in).An example of the application of this exception would be a case where the employee injured himself or herself by choking on a sandwich brought from home but eaten in the employer's establishment; such a case would not be considered work-related under this exception. On the other hand, if the employee was injured by a trip or fall hazard present in the employer's lunchroom, the case would be considered work-related. In addition, a note to the exception makes clear that if an employee becomes ill as a result of ingesting food contaminated by workplace contaminants such as lead, or contracts food poisoning from food items provided by the employer, the case would be considered work-related. As a result, if an employee contracts food poisoning from a sandwich brought from home or purchased in the company cafeteria and must take time off to recover, the case is not considered work related. On the other hand, if an employee contracts food poisoning from a meal provided by the employer at a business meeting or company function and takes time off to recover, the case would be considered work related. Food provided or supplied by the employer does not include food purchased by the employee from the company cafeteria, but does include food purchased by the employer from the company cafeteria for business meetings or other company functions. (v) Injuries and illnesses will not be considered work-related if they are solely the result of employees doing personal tasks (unrelated to their employment) at the establishment outside of their assigned working hours.This exception, which responds to inquiries received over the years, allows employers limited flexibility to exclude from the recordkeeping system situations where the employee is using the employer's establishment for purely personal reasons during his or her off-shift time. For example, if an employee were using a meeting room at the employer's establishment outside of his or her assigned working hours to hold a meeting for a civic group to which he or she belonged, and slipped and fell in the hallway, the injury would not be considered work-related. On the other hand, if the employee were at the employer's establishment outside his or her assigned working hours to attend a company business meeting or a company training session, such a slip or fall would be work-related. (vi) Injuries and illnesses will not be considered work-related if they are solely the result of personal grooming, self-medication for a non-work-related condition, or are intentionally self-inflicted.This exception allows the employer to exclude from the Log cases related to personal hygiene, self-administered medications and intentional self-inflicted injuries, such as attempted suicide. For example, a burn injury from a hair dryer used at work to dry the employee's hair would not be work-related. Similarly, a negative reaction to a medication brought from home to treat a non-work condition would not be considered a work-related illness, even though it first manifested at work. (vii) Injuries will not be considered work-related if they are caused by motor vehicle accidents occurring in company parking lots or on company access roads while employees are commuting to or from work.This exception allows the employer to exclude cases where an employee is injured in a motor vehicle accident while commuting from work to home or from home to work or while on a personal errand. For example, if an employee was injured in a car accident while arriving at work or while leaving the company's property at the end of the day, or while driving on his or her lunch hour to run an errand, the case would not be considered work-related. On the other hand, if an employee was injured in a car accident while leaving the property to purchase supplies for the employer, the case would be work-related. Some injuries and illnesses that occur in company parking lots are clearly caused by work conditions or activities -- e.g., being struck by a car while painting parking space indicators on the pavement of the lot, slipping on ice permitted to accumulate in the lot by the employer -- and by their nature point to conditions that could be corrected to improve workplace safety and health. (viii) Common colds and flu will not be considered work-related.Paragraph 1904.5(b)(2)(viii) allows the employer to exclude cases of common cold or flu, even if contracted while the employee was at work. However, in the case of other infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, brucellosis, and hepatitis C, employers must evaluate reports of such illnesses for work relationship, just as they would any other type of injury or illness. (ix) Mental illness will not be considered work-related unless the employee voluntarily provides the employer with an opinion from a physician or other licensed health care professional with appropriate training and experience (psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse practitioner, etc.) stating that the employee has a mental illness that is work-related.Recording work-related mental illnesses involves several unique issues, including the difficulty of detecting, diagnosing and verifying mental illnesses; and the sensitivity and privacy concerns raised by mental illnesses. Therefore, the final rule requires employers to record only those mental illnesses verified by a health care professional with appropriate training and experience in the treatment of mental illness, such as a psychiatrist, psychologist, or psychiatric nurse practitioner. The employer is under no obligation to seek out information on mental illnesses from its employees, and employers are required to consider mental illness cases only when an employee voluntarily presents the employer with an opinion from the health care professional that the employee has a mental illness and that it is work related. In the event that the employer does not believe the reported mental illness is work-related, the employer may refer the case to a physician or other licensed health care professional for a second opinion. OSHA also emphasizes that work-related mental illnesses, like other illnesses, must be recorded only when they meet the severity criteria outlined in Section 1904.7. In addition, for mental illnesses, the employee's identity must be protected by omitting the employee's name from the OSHA 300 Log and instead entering "privacy concern case" as required by Section 1904.29. Proposed Exception.... The Case Results Solely From Normal Body Movements, not Job-Related Motions or Contribution from the Work Environment. ...OSHA has decided not to include a recordkeeping exception for injuries or illnesses associated with normal body movements in the final rule....Further, the final rule already makes clear that injuries and illnesses that result solely from non-work causes are not considered work-related and therefore are excluded from the Log, and establishes the requirements employers must follow to determine work-relationship for an injury or illness when it is unclear whether the precipitating event occurred in the workplace or elsewhere (see paragraph 1904.5(b)(3)). According to the requirements in that section, the employer must evaluate the employee's work duties and the work environment to decide whether it is more likely than not that events or exposures in the work environment either caused or contributed to the condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing condition. If so, the case is work-related. Additional Exceptions Suggested by Commenters but Not Adopted [in the final rule]. ...Acts of God:... OSHA has not adopted such an exception because doing so would not be in keeping with the geographic presumption underpinning this final rule, and would exclude cases that are in fact work-related. For example, if a worker was injured in a flood while at work, the case would be work-related, even though the flood could be considered an act of God. Accordingly, if workplace injuries and illnesses result from these events, they must be entered into the records (for a more detailed discussion of this point, see the Legal Authority section, above). Phobias:... OSHA has not included an exception from recording in the final recordkeeping regulation for phobias or any other type of mental illness. Voluntary participation in a medical activity. OSHA also believes that it would be unreasonable to omit a case of loss of consciousness resulting from the administration of a blood test for lead exposure at work. These tests are necessitated by the employee's exposure to lead at work and are required by OSHA's lead standard (29 CFR 1910.1025). The other scenarios presented by these commenters, involving spiders, snakes, etc., would also be work-related under the geographic presumption. Illegal activities and horseplay:... OSHA has not adopted any of these recommended exceptions in the final recordkeeping rule because excluding these injuries and illnesses would be inconsistent with OSHA's longstanding reliance on the geographic presumption to establish work-relatedness. Furthermore, the Agency believes that many of the working conditions pointed to in these comments involve occupational factors, such as the effectiveness of disciplinary policies and supervision. Thus, recording such incidents may serve to alert both the employer and employees to workplace safety and health issues. Non-occupational degenerative conditions:... such as high blood pressure, arthritis, coronary artery disease, heart attacks, and cancer that can develop regardless of workplace exposure. OSHA has not added such an exception to the rule, but the Agency believes that the fact that the rule expects employers confronted with such cases to make a determination about the extent to which, if at all, work contributed to the observed condition will provide direction about how to determine the work-relatedness of such cases. For example, if work contributes to the illness in some way, then it is work-related and must be evaluated for its recordability. On the other hand, if the case is wholly caused by non-work factors, then it is not work-related and will not be recorded in the OSHA records. Determining Whether the Precipitating Event or Exposure Occurred in the Work Environment or Elsewhere Paragraph 1904.5(b)(3) of the final rule provides guidance on applying the geographic presumption when it is not clear whether the event or exposure that precipitated the injury or illness occurred in the work environment or elsewhere. If an employee reports pain and swelling in a joint but cannot say whether the symptoms first arose during work or during recreational activities at home, it may be difficult for the employer to decide whether the case is work-related. The same problem arises when an employee reports symptoms of a contagious disease that affects the public at large, such as a staphylococcus infection ("staph" infection) or Lyme disease, and the workplace is only one possible source of the infection. In these situations, the employer must examine the employee's work duties and environment to determine whether it is more likely than not that one or more events or exposures at work caused or contributed to the condition. If the employer determines that it is unlikely that the precipitating event or exposure occurred in the work environment, the employer would not record the case. In the staph infection example given above, the employer would consider the case work-related, for example, if another employee with whom the newly infected employee had contact at work had been out with a staph infection. In the Lyme disease example, the employer would determine the case to be work-related if, for example, the employee was a groundskeeper with regular exposure to outdoor conditions likely to result in contact with deer ticks. In applying paragraph 1904.5(b)(3), the question employers must answer is whether the precipitating event or exposure occurred in the work environment. If an event, such as a fall, an awkward motion or lift, an assault, or an instance of horseplay, occurs at work, the geographic presumption applies and the case is work-related unless it otherwise falls within an exception. Thus, if an employee trips while walking across a level factory floor, the resulting injury is considered work-related under the geographic presumption because the precipitating event -- the tripping accident -- occurred in the workplace. The case is work-related even if the employer cannot determine why the employee tripped, or whether any particular workplace hazard caused the accident to occur. However, if the employee reports an injury at work but cannot say whether it resulted from an event that occurred at work or at home, as in the example of the swollen joint, the employer might determine that the case is not work-related because the employee's work duties were unlikely to have caused, contributed to, or significantly aggravated such an injury. Significant Workplace Aggravation of a Pre-existing Condition In paragraph 1904.5(b)(4), the final rule...requires that the amount of aggravation of the injury or illness that work contributes must be "significant," i.e., non-minor, before work-relatedness is established. The preexisting injury or illness must be one caused entirely by non-occupational factors.... OSHA agrees that non-work-related injuries and illnesses should not be recorded on the OSHA Log. To ensure that non-work-related cases are not entered on the Log, paragraph 1904.5(b)(2)(ii) requires employers to consider as non-work-related any injury or illness that "involves signs or symptoms that surface at work but result solely from a non-work-related event or exposure that occurs outside the work environment." The Agency also believes that preexisting injury or illness cases that have been aggravated by events or exposures in the work environment represent cases that should be recorded on the Log, because work has clearly worsened the injury or illness. OSHA is concerned, however, that there are some cases where work-related aggravation affects the preexisting case only in a minor way, i.e., in a way that does not appreciably worsen the preexisting condition, alter its nature, change the extent of the medical treatment, trigger lost time, or require job transfer. Accordingly, the final rule requires that workplace events or exposures must "significantly" aggravate a pre-existing injury or illness case before the case is presumed to be work-related. Paragraph 1904.5(a) states that an injury or illness is considered work-related if "an event or exposure in the work environment either caused or contributed to the resulting condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury or illness." Paragraph 1904.5(b)(4) of the final rule defines aggravation as significant if the contribution of the aggravation at work is such that it results in tangible consequences that go beyond those that the worker would have experienced as a result of the preexisting injury or illness alone, absent the aggravating effects of the workplace. Under the final rule, a preexisting injury or illness will be considered to have been significantly aggravated, for the purposes of OSHA injury and illness recordkeeping, when an event or exposure in the work environment results in: (i) Death, providing that the preexisting injury or illness would likely not have resulted in death but for the occupational event or exposure; (ii) Loss of consciousness, providing that the preexisting injury or illness would likely not have resulted in loss of consciousness but for the occupational event or exposure; (iii) A day or days away from work or of restricted work, or a job transfer that otherwise would not have occurred but for the occupational event or exposure; or (iv) Medical treatment where no medical treatment was needed for the injury or illness before the workplace event or exposure, or a change in the course of medical treatment that was being provided before the workplace event or exposure. OSHA's decision not to require the recording of cases involving only minor aggravation of preexisting conditions is consistent with the Agency's efforts in this rulemaking to require the recording only of non-minor injuries and illnesses; for example, the final rule also no longer requires employers to record minor illnesses on the Log. Preexisting Conditions Paragraph 1904.5(b)(5) stipulates that pre-existing conditions, for recordkeeping purposes, are conditions that resulted solely from a non-work-related event or exposure that occurs outside the employer's work environment. Pre-existing conditions also include any injury or illness that the employee experienced while working for another employer. Off Premises Determinations ...In the final rule, (paragraph 1904.5(b)(1)) the same concept is carried forward in the definition of the work environment, which defines the environment as including the establishment and any other location where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. Thus, when employees are working or conducting other tasks in the interest of their employer but at a location away from the employer's establishment, the work-relatedness of an injury or illness that arises is subject to the same decision making process that would occur if the case had occurred at the establishment itself. The case is work-related if one or more events or exposures in the work environment either caused or contributed to the resulting condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing condition, as stated in paragraph 1904.5(a). In addition, the exceptions for determining work relationship at paragraph 1904.5(b)(2) and the requirements at paragraph 1904.5(b)(3) apply equally to cases that occur at or away from the establishment. As an example, the work-environment presumption clearly applies to the case of a delivery driver who experiences an injury to his or her back while loading boxes and transporting them into a building. The worker is engaged in a work activity and the injury resulted from an event -- loading/unloading -- occurring in the work environment. Similarly, if an employee is injured in an automobile accident while running errands for the company or traveling to make a speech on behalf of the company, the employee is present at the scene as a condition of employment, and any resulting injury would be work-related. Employees on Travel Status The final rule continues (at Section 1904.5(b)(6)) OSHA's longstanding practice of treating injuries and illnesses that occur to an employee on travel status as work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities "in the interest of the employer." Examples of such activities include travel to and from customer contacts, conducting job tasks, and entertaining or being entertained if the activity is conducted at the direction of the employer. The final rule contains three exceptions for travel-status situations. The rule describes situations in which injuries or illnesses sustained by traveling employees are not considered work-related for OSHA recordkeeping purposes and therefore do not have to be recorded on the OSHA 300 Log. First, when a traveling employee checks into a hotel, motel, or other temporary residence, he or she is considered to have established a "home away from home." At this time, the status of the employee is the same as that of an employee working at an establishment who leaves work and is essentially "at home." Injuries and illnesses that occur at home are generally not considered work related. However, just as an employer may sometimes be required to record an injury or illness occurring to an employee working in his or her home, the employer is required to record an injury or illness occurring to an employee who is working in his or her hotel room (see the discussion of working at home, below). Second, if an employee has established a "home away from home" and is reporting to a fixed worksite each day, the employer does not consider injuries or illnesses work-related if they occur while the employee is commuting between the temporary residence and the job location. These cases are parallel to those involving employees commuting to and from work when they are at their home location, and do not have to be recorded, just as injuries and illnesses that occur during normal commuting are not required to be recorded. Third, the employer is not required to consider an injury or illness to be work-related if it occurs while the employee is on a personal detour from the route of business travel. This exception allows the employer to exclude injuries and illnesses that occur when the worker has taken a side trip for personal reasons while on a business trip, such as a vacation or sight-seeing excursion, to visit relatives, or for some other personal purpose.... OSHA has decided not to limit the recording of occupational injuries and illnesses to those cases that are preventable, fall within the employer's control, or are covered by the employer's safety and health program. The issue is not whether the conditions could have, or should have, been prevented or whether they were controllable, but simply whether they are occupational,i.e., are related to work. This is true regardless of whether the employee is injured while on travel or while present at the employer's workplace. An employee who is injured in an automobile accident or killed in an airline crash while traveling for the company has clearly experienced a work-related injury that is rightfully included in the OSHA injury and illness records and the Nation's occupational injury and illness statistics.... ...[T]he Agency believes that employees who are engaged in management, sales, customer service and similar jobs must often entertain clients, and that doing so is a business activity that requires the employee to work at the direction of the employer while conducting such tasks. If the employee is injured or becomes ill while engaged in such work, the injury or illness is work-related and should be recorded if it meets one or more of the other criteria (death, medical treatment, etc.). Gastroenteritis, for example...is one type of injury or illness that may occur in this situation, but employees are also injured in accidents while transporting clients to business-related events at the direction of the employer or by other events or exposures arising in the work environment. On the other hand, not all injuries and illnesses sustained in the course of business-related entertainment are reportable. To be recordable, the entertainment activity must be one that the employee engages in at the direction of the employer. Business-related entertainment activities that are undertaken voluntarily by an employee in the exercise of his or her discretion are not covered by the rule. For example, if an employee attending a professional conference at the direction of the employer goes out for an evening of entertainment with friends, some of whom happen to be clients or customers, any injury or illness resulting from the entertainment activities would not be recordable. In this case, the employee was socializing after work, not entertaining at the direction of the employer. Similarly, the fact that an employee joins a private club or organization, perhaps to "network" or make business contacts, does not make any injury that occurs there work-related.... ...OSHA notes that the recordkeeping regulation does not apply to travel outside the United States because the OSH Act applies only to the confines of the United States (29 U.S.C. Section 652(4)) and not to foreign operations. Therefore, the OSHA recordkeeping regulation does not apply to non-U.S. operations, and injuries or illnesses that may occur to a worker traveling outside the United States need not be recorded on the OSHA 300 Log. Working at Home The final rule also includes provisions at Section 1904.5(b)(7) for determining the work-relatedness of injuries and illnesses that may arise when employees are working at home. When an employee is working on company business in his or her home and reports an injury or illness to his or her employer, and the employee's work activities caused or contributed to the injury or illness, or significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury, the case is considered work-related and must be further evaluated to determine whether it meets the recording criteria. If the injury or illness is related to non-work activities or to the general home environment, the case is not considered work-related. The final rule includes examples to illustrate how employers are required to record injuries and illnesses occurring at home. If an employee drops a box of work documents and injures his or her foot, the case would be considered work-related. If an employee's fingernail was punctured and became infected by a needle from a sewing machine used to perform garment work at home, the injury would be considered work-related. If an employee was injured because he or she tripped on the family dog while rushing to answer a work phone call, the case would not be considered work-related. If an employee working at home is electrocuted because of faulty home wiring, the injury would not be considered work-related.... ...Injuries and illnesses occurring while the employee is working for pay or compensation at home should be treated like injuries and illnesses sustained by employees while traveling on business. The relevant question is whether or not the injury or illness is work-related, not whether there is some element of employer control. The mere recording of these injuries and illnesses as work-related cases does not place the employer in the role of insuring the safety of the home environment.... ...OSHA has recently issued a compliance directive (CPL 2-0.125)....That document clarifies that OSHA will not conduct inspections of home offices and does not hold employers liable for employees' home offices. The compliance directive also notes that employers required by the recordkeeping rule to keep records "will continue to be responsible for keeping such records, regardless of whether the injuries occur in the factory, in a home office, or elsewhere, as long as they are work-related, and meet the recordability criteria of 29 CFR Part 1904." With more employees working at home under various telecommuting and flexible workplace arrangements, OSHA believes that it is important to record injuries and illnesses attributable to work tasks performed at home. If these cases are not recorded, the Nation's injury and illness statistics could be skewed. For example, placing such an exclusion in the final rule would make it difficult to determine if a decline in the overall number or rate of occupational injuries and illnesses is attributable to a trend toward working at home or to a change in the Nation's actual injury and illness experience. Further, excluding these work-related injuries and illnesses from the recordkeeping system could potentially obscure previously unidentified causal connections between events or exposures in the work environment and these incidents. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.5 (OSHA Instruction, CPL 2-00.135, Chap. 5) Section 1904.5 Determination of work-relatedness Question 5-1. If a maintenance employee is cleaning the parking lot or an access road and is injured as a result, is the case work-related? Yes, the case is work-related because the employee is injured as a result of conducting company business in the work environment. If the injury meets the general recording criteria of Section 1904.7 (death, days away, etc.), the case must be recorded. Question 5-2. Are cases of workplace violence considered work-related under the new Recordkeeping rule? The Recordkeeping rule contains no general exception, for purposes of determining work-relationship, for cases involving acts of violence in the work environment. However, some cases involving violent acts might be included within one of the exceptions listed in section 1904.5(b)(2). For example, if an employee arrives at work early to use a company conference room for a civic club meeting and is injured by some violent act, the case would not be work-related under the exception in section 1904.5(b)(2)(v). Question 5-3. What activities are considered "personal grooming" for purposes of the exception to the geographic presumption of work-relatedness in section 1904.5(b)(2)(vi)? Personal grooming activities are activities directly related to personal hygiene, such as combing and drying hair, brushing teeth, clipping fingernails and the like. Bathing or showering at the workplace when necessary because of an exposure to a substance at work is not within the personal grooming exception in section 1904.5(b)(2)(vi). Thus, if an employee slips and falls while showering at work to remove a contaminant to which he has been exposed at work, and sustains an injury that meets one of the general recording criteria listed in section 1904.7(b)(1), the case is recordable. Question 5-4. What are "assigned working hours" for purposes of the exception to the geographic presumption in section 1904.5(b)(2)(v)? "Assigned working hours," for purposes of section 1904.5(b)(2)(v), means those hours the employee is actually expected to work, including overtime. Question 5-5. What are "personal tasks" for purposes of the exception to the geographic presumption in section 1904.5(b)(2)(v)? "Personal tasks" for purposes of section 1904.5(b)(2)(v) are tasks that are unrelated to the employee's job. For example, if an employee uses a company break area to work on his child's science project, he is engaged in a personal task. Question 5-6. If an employee stays at work after normal work hours to prepare for the next day's tasks and is injured, is the case work-related? For example, if an employee stays after work to prepare air-sampling pumps and is injured, is the case work-related? A case is work-related any time an event or exposure in the work environment either causes or contributes to an injury or illness or significantly aggravates a pre-existing injury or illness, unless one of the exceptions in section 1904.5(b)(2) applies. The work environment includes the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. The case in question would be work-related if the employee was injured as a result of an event or exposure at work, regardless of whether the injury occurred after normal work hours. Question 5-7. If an employee voluntarily takes work home and is injured while working at home, is the case recordable? No. Injuries and illnesses occurring in the home e | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||