§1904.5the worker has taken a side trip for personal reasonswhile on a business trip, such as a vacation or sightseeingexcursion, to visit relatives, or for some otherpersonal purpose….However, as discussed in the Legal Authority sectionand the introduction to the work-relationshipsection of the preamble, <strong>OSHA</strong> has decided not tolimit the recording of occupational injuries and illnessesto those cases that are preventable, fall withinthe employer’s control, or are covered by theemployer’s safety and health program. The issue isnot whether the conditions could have, or shouldhave, been prevented or whether they were controllable,but simply whether they are occupational, i.e.,are related to work. This is true regardless of whetherthe employee is injured while on travel or while presentat the employer’s workplace. An employee who isinjured in an automobile accident or killed in an airlinecrash while traveling for the company has clearlyexperienced a work-related injury that is rightfullyincluded in the <strong>OSHA</strong> injury and illness records andthe Nation’s occupational injury and illness statistics…....[T]he Agency believes that employees who areengaged in management, sales, customer serviceand similar jobs must often entertain clients, and thatdoing so is a business activity that requires theemployee to work at the direction of the employerwhile conducting such tasks. If the employee isinjured or becomes ill while engaged in such work,the injury or illness is work-related and should berecorded if it meets one or more of the other criteria(death, medical treatment, etc.). The gastroenteritisexample...is one type of injury or illness that mayoccur in this situation, but employees are also injuredin accidents while transporting clients to businessrelatedevents at the direction of the employer or byother events or exposures arising in the work environment.On the other hand, not all injuries and illnessessustained in the course of business-related entertainmentare reportable. To be recordable, the entertainmentactivity must be one that the employeeengages in at the direction of the employer.Business-related entertainment activities that areundertaken voluntarily by an employee in the exerciseof his or her discretion are not covered by therule. For example, if an employee attending a professionalconference at the direction of the employergoes out for an evening of entertainment withfriends, some of whom happen to be clients or customers,any injury or illness resulting from the entertainmentactivities would not be recordable. In thiscase, the employee was socializing after work, notentertaining at the direction of the employer.Similarly, the fact that an employee joins a privateclub or organization, perhaps to “<strong>net</strong>work” or makebusiness contacts, does not make any injury thatoccurs there work-related….<strong>OSHA</strong> believes that expanding the concept ofwork-related travel to include all of the time theworker spends on a trip would be inconsistent withthe tests of work-relationship governing the recordingof other injuries and illnesses and would thereforeskew the statistics and confuse employers….…<strong>OSHA</strong> is therefore continuing the Agency’s practiceof excluding certain cases while employees arein travel status and applying the exceptions to thegeographic presumption in the final rule to thoseoccurring while the worker is traveling….…<strong>OSHA</strong> notes that the recordkeeping regulationdoes not apply to travel outside the United Statesbecause the OSH Act applies only to the confines ofthe United States (29 U.S.C. Section 652(4)) and notto foreign operations. Therefore, the <strong>OSHA</strong> recordkeepingregulation does not apply to non-U.S. operations,and injuries or illnesses that may occur to aworker traveling outside the United States need notbe recorded on the <strong>OSHA</strong> 300 Log.Working at HomeThe final rule also includes provisions at Section1904.5(b)(7) for determining the work-relatedness ofinjuries and illnesses that may arise when employeesare working at home. When an employee is workingon company business in his or her home and reportsan injury or illness to his or her employer, and theemployee’s work activities caused or contributed tothe injury or illness, or significantly aggravated a preexistinginjury, the case is considered work-relatedand must be further evaluated to determine whetherit meets the recording criteria. If the injury or illnessis related to non-work activities or to the generalhome environment, the case is not considered workrelated.The final rule includes examples to illustrate howemployers are required to record injuries and illnessesoccurring at home. If an employee drops a box ofwork documents and injures his or her foot, the casewould be considered work-related. If an employee’sfingernail was punctured and became infected by aneedle from a sewing machine used to perform garmentwork at home, the injury would be consideredwork-related. If an employee was injured because heor she tripped on the family dog while rushing toanswer a work phone call, the case would not be24<strong>OSHA</strong> RECORDKEEPINGHANDBOOK
considered work-related. If an employee working athome is electrocuted because of faulty home wiring,the injury would not be considered work-related….…Injuries and illnesses occurring while theemployee is working for pay or compensation athome should be treated like injuries and illnessessustained by employees while traveling on business.The relevant question is whether or not the injury orillness is work-related, not whether there is some elementof employer control. The mere recording ofthese injuries and illnesses as work-related casesdoes not place the employer in the role of insuringthe safety of the home environment….…<strong>OSHA</strong> has recently issued a compliance directive(CPL 2-0.125)….That document clarifies that<strong>OSHA</strong> will not conduct inspections of home officesand does not hold employers liable for employees’home offices. The compliance directive also notesthat employers required by the recordkeeping rule tokeep records “will continue to be responsible forkeeping such records, regardless of whether theinjuries occur in the factory, in a home office, or elsewhere,as long as they are work-related, and meetthe recordability criteria of 29 CFR Part 1904.”With more employees working at home undervarious telecommuting and flexible workplacearrangements, <strong>OSHA</strong> believes that it is important torecord injuries and illnesses attributable to worktasks performed at home. If these cases are notrecorded, the Nation’s injury and illness statisticscould be skewed. For example, placing such anexclusion in the final rule would make it difficult todetermine if a decline in the overall number or rate ofoccupational injuries and illnesses is attributable to atrend toward working at home or to a change in theNation’s actual injury and illness experience. Further,excluding these work-related injuries and illnessesfrom the recordkeeping system could potentiallyobscure previously unidentified causal connectionsbetween events or exposures in the work environmentand these incidents. <strong>OSHA</strong> is unwilling to adoptan exception that would have these potentialeffects….FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section 1904.5 (<strong>OSHA</strong> Instruction, CPL 2-0.135, Chap. 5)Section 1904.5 Determination of work-relatednessQuestion 5-1. If a maintenance employee is cleaningthe parking lot or an access road and is injured as aresult, is the case work-related?Yes, the case is work-related because the employee isinjured as a result of conducting company businessin the work environment. If the injury meets the generalrecording criteria of Section 1904.7 (death, daysaway, etc.), the case must be recorded.Question 5-2. Are cases of workplace violence consideredwork-related under the new <strong>Recordkeeping</strong>rule?The <strong>Recordkeeping</strong> 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 actsmight be included within one of the exceptions listedin section 1904.5(b)(2). For example, if an employeearrives at work early to use a company conferenceroom for a civic club meeting and is injured by someviolent act, the case would not be work-related underthe exception in section 1904.5(b)(2)(v).Question 5-3. What activities are considered “personalgrooming” for purposes of the exception to thegeographic presumption of work-relatedness insection 1904.5(b)(2)(vi)?Personal grooming activities are activities directlyrelated to personal hygiene, such as combing anddrying hair, brushing teeth, clipping fingernails andthe like. Bathing or showering at the workplace whennecessary because of an exposure to a substance atwork is not within the personal grooming exceptionin section 1904.5(b)(2)(vi). Thus, if an employee slipsand falls while showering at work to remove a contaminantto which he has been exposed at work, andsustains an injury that meets one of the generalrecording criteria listed in section 1904.7(b)(1), thecase is recordable.Question 5-4. What are “assigned working hours”for purposes of the exception to the geographic presumptionin section 1904.5(b)(2)(v)?“Assigned working hours,” for purposes of section1904.5(b)(2)(v), means those hours the employee isactually expected to work, including overtime.Question 5-5. What are “personal tasks” for purposesof the exception to the geographic presumption insection 1904.5(b)(2)(v)?§1904.5<strong>OSHA</strong> RECORDKEEPINGHANDBOOK25
- Page 1 and 2: www.osha.govOSHARecordkeepingHandbo
- Page 3 and 4: OSHARecordkeeping HandbookThe Regul
- Page 5 and 6: ContentsRecordkeeping HandbookRoadm
- Page 7 and 8: Section 1904.40Providing records to
- Page 9 and 10: Section 1904.0Purpose(66 FR 6122, J
- Page 11 and 12: Section 1904.1Partial exemption for
- Page 13 and 14: Section 1904.2Partial exemption for
- Page 15 and 16: employees, to OSHA within 8 hours (
- Page 17 and 18: Partial Exemptions for Employers Un
- Page 19 and 20: Section 1904.4Recording criteria(66
- Page 21 and 22: Section 1904.5Determination of work
- Page 23 and 24: (b)(7) How do I decide if a case is
- Page 25 and 26: well, including providing informati
- Page 27 and 28: This exception, which responds to i
- Page 29 and 30: or she is in the work environment a
- Page 31: have occurred but for the occupatio
- Page 35 and 36: Question 5-12. Is work-related stre
- Page 37 and 38: • The doctor described the illnes
- Page 39 and 40: Scenario 7:• A site hired numerou
- Page 41 and 42: Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 43 and 44: These principles should be applied
- Page 45 and 46: The problem with the response is tw
- Page 47 and 48: Section 1904.6Determination of new
- Page 49 and 50: the Guidelines stated that “the a
- Page 51 and 52: estricted work. If the case is a pr
- Page 53 and 54: • The doctor also prescribed the
- Page 55 and 56: • The employees were under the di
- Page 57 and 58: Section 1904.7General recording cri
- Page 59 and 60: (iii) Do I have to record restricte
- Page 61 and 62: of the length of time the employee
- Page 63 and 64: then result in days away from work
- Page 65 and 66: A partial day of work is recorded a
- Page 67 and 68: In all other respects, the final ru
- Page 69 and 70: ments. The Agency believes that the
- Page 71 and 72: e recorded because it will require
- Page 73 and 74: However, episodes of fainting from
- Page 75 and 76: care professional, he or she may al
- Page 77 and 78: “Other simple means” of removin
- Page 79 and 80: For purposes of OSHA recordkeeping
- Page 81 and 82: • When answering the doctor’s q
- Page 83 and 84:
Response: In the recordkeeping regu
- Page 85 and 86:
Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 87 and 88:
Section 1904.8Recording criteria fo
- Page 89 and 90:
caused by contaminated needles and
- Page 91 and 92:
Section 1904.9Recording criteria fo
- Page 93 and 94:
Section 1904.10Recording criteria f
- Page 95 and 96:
hearing loss case that is not relat
- Page 97 and 98:
average of 10 decibels or more at 2
- Page 99 and 100:
argued that because the function of
- Page 101 and 102:
occurs, and where hearing loss can
- Page 103 and 104:
cases in their workplace via analys
- Page 105 and 106:
March 4, 2004Mr. Carl O. Sall, CIHD
- Page 107 and 108:
When the professional evaluating th
- Page 109 and 110:
(2) May I line-out or erase a recor
- Page 111 and 112:
Section 1904.12Recording criteria f
- Page 113 and 114:
These new statistics would add only
- Page 115 and 116:
Sections 1904.13 - 1904.28 Reserved
- Page 117 and 118:
two lines of the OSHA 300 Log to de
- Page 119 and 120:
which replace the OSHA 200 and 101
- Page 121 and 122:
different types of occupational ill
- Page 123 and 124:
OSHA 301 form. These data are usefu
- Page 125 and 126:
LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section
- Page 127 and 128:
Question 2: Under 29 CFR Section 19
- Page 129 and 130:
and has adopted language in the fin
- Page 131 and 132:
Section 1904.31Covered employees(66
- Page 133 and 134:
label assigned to a worker is immat
- Page 135 and 136:
These workers should be evaluated j
- Page 137 and 138:
Response: A case is work-related if
- Page 139 and 140:
Response: Section 1904.31 states th
- Page 141 and 142:
Thank you for your interest in occu
- Page 143 and 144:
year covered by the summary. The su
- Page 145 and 146:
2. Number of employees and hours wo
- Page 147 and 148:
LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section
- Page 149 and 150:
Section 1904.33Retention and updati
- Page 151 and 152:
June 23, 2003Mr. Edwin G. Foulke, J
- Page 153 and 154:
Section 1904.34Change in business o
- Page 155 and 156:
PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.3
- Page 157 and 158:
Incident Report (Forms 300 and 301,
- Page 159 and 160:
workers’ compensation claim. See
- Page 161 and 162:
LETTERS OF INTERPRETATION: Section
- Page 163 and 164:
Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 165 and 166:
Question 3: Using the facts in Ques
- Page 167 and 168:
Section 1904.37State recordkeeping
- Page 169 and 170:
tion, require employers to report f
- Page 171 and 172:
(5) If I receive a variance, may th
- Page 173 and 174:
Section 1904.39Reporting fatalities
- Page 175 and 176:
gation. Therefore, the final rule d
- Page 177 and 178:
Section 1904.40Providing records to
- Page 179 and 180:
ness. The government inspector may
- Page 181 and 182:
Response: The controlling employer
- Page 183 and 184:
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section
- Page 185 and 186:
OSHA and the BLS have worked togeth
- Page 187 and 188:
provide copies of the retained reco
- Page 189 and 190:
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section
- Page 191 and 192:
Section 1904.46Definitions(66 FR 61
- Page 193 and 194:
of business information. For exampl
- Page 195 and 196:
inconvenience associated with keepi
- Page 197 and 198:
skin disease, respiratory disorder,
- Page 199 and 200:
Question 2: Under 29 CFR Section 19
- Page 201:
www.osha.gov