§1904.1088<strong>OSHA</strong> RECORDKEEPINGcorrection values to actual employee audiometricdata. However, since the Occupational Noise standarditself permits employers to adjust the interpretationof audiograms for the effects of aging, it wouldbe inconsistent and administratively complex to prohibitthis practice in the recordkeeping rule. Accordingly,Section 1904.10(b)(3) allows the employer toadjust for aging when determining the recordabilityof hearing loss. The adjustment is made using TablesF-1 or F-2, as appropriate (table F-1 applies to menand F-2 applies to women), in Appendix F of 29 CFR1910.95. However, use of the correction for aging isnot mandatory, just as it is not mandatory in theNoise standard itself…....[I]n the final rule, at paragraph 1904.10(b)(4),employers are permitted, if they choose, to retest theemployee to confirm or disprove that an STS reflectedon the first audiogram was attributable to a coldor some other extraneous factor and was not persistent.If the employer elects to retest, the employerneed not record the case until the retest is completed.If the retest confirms the hearing loss results, thecase must be recorded within 7 calendar days. If theretest refutes the original test, the case is not recordable,and the employer does not have to take furtheraction for <strong>OSHA</strong> recordkeeping purposes. The 30 daylimit in the final recordkeeping rule is consistent withthe 30 day retest provision of Section 1910.95(g)(5)(ii),which allows the employer to obtain a retest within30 days and consider the results of the retest as theannual audiogram if the STS recorded on the firsttest is determined not to persist.<strong>OSHA</strong> believes that the 30 day retest optionallows the employer to exclude false positive resultsand temporary threshold shifts from the data whileensuring the timely and appropriate recording of truepositive results. Adding language to the final recordkeepingrule to specify different procedures, dependingon whether the employer chooses to conduct are-test within 30 days, adds some complexity to thefinal rule, but <strong>OSHA</strong> finds that this added complexityis appropriate because it will reduce burden for someemployers and improve the accuracy of the hearingloss data…....For workers who are exposed to the noise levelsthat require medical surveillance under Section1910.95 (an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85dB(A) or greater, or a total noise dose of 50 percent),it is highly likely that workplace noise is the cause ofor, at a minimum, has contributed to the observedSTS. It is not necessary for the workplace to be thesole cause, or even the predominant cause, of thehearing loss in order for it to be work-related. Becausethe final recordkeeping rule relies upon thecoverage of the Occupational Noise standard, it isalso not necessary for <strong>OSHA</strong> to include a minimumtime of exposure provision. The Occupational Noisestandard does not require a baseline audiogram tobe taken for up to six months after the employee isfirst exposed to noise in the workplace, and the nextannual audiogram would not be taken until a yearafter that.For any worker to have an applicable change inaudiogram results under the Occupational Noisestandard, the worker would have been exposed tolevels of noise exceeding 85 dB(A) for at least a year,and possibly even for 18 months.In addition, the provisions allowing for review by aphysician or other licensed health care professionalallow for the exclusion of hearing loss cases that arenot caused by noise exposure, such as off the job traumaticinjury to the ear, infections, and the like. <strong>OSHA</strong>notes that this presumption is consistent with a similarpresumption in <strong>OSHA</strong>’s Occupational Noise standard(in both cases, an employer is permitted to rebut thispresumption if he or she suspects that the hearingloss shown on an employer’s audiogram in fact has amedical etiology and this is confirmed by a physicianor other licensed health care professional)….Shifts in hearing must be calculated separately foreach ear, in accordance with the requirements ofSection 1910.95. However, if a single audiogramreflects a loss of hearing in both ears, only one hearingloss case must be entered into the records. Theissue of revising baseline audiograms to evaluate theextent of future hearing loss pertains to a hearingloss case that has been entered on the Log. If a single-earSTS loss has been recorded on the Log, thenthe baseline audiogram should be adjusted for thatear, and that ear only. If an STS affecting both earshas been recorded on the Log, then the baselineaudiogram may be revised and applied to both ears.This means that there should be no cases where thebaseline audiogram has been adjusted and the casehas not been recorded on the Log.[67 FR 44038, July 1, 2002]II. Recording Occupational Hearing Loss CasesSection 1904.10 of the January 19, 2001 final recordkeepingrule required employers to record, by checkingthe “hearing loss” column on the <strong>OSHA</strong> 300 Log,all cases in which an employee’s hearing test (audiogram)revealed that a Standard Threshold Shift (STS)in hearing acuity had occurred. An STS was definedas “a change in hearing threshold, relative to themost recent audiogram for that employee, of anHANDBOOK
average of 10 decibels or more at 2000, 3000 and4000 Hertz (Hz) in one or both ears.” The recordkeepingrule itself does not require the employer to testemployee’s hearing. However, <strong>OSHA</strong>’s occupationalnoise standard (29 CFR 1910.95) requires employersin general industry to conduct periodic audiometrictesting of employees when employees’ noise exposuresare equal to, or exceed, an 8-hour time-weightedaverage of 85dBA. Under the provisions ofSection 1910.95, if such testing reveals that anemployee has sustained a hearing loss equal to anSTS, the employer must take protective measures,including requiring the use of hearing protectors, toprevent further hearing loss. Employers in the construction,agriculture, oil and gas drilling and servicing,and shipbuilding industries are not covered bySection 1910.95, and therefore are not required by<strong>OSHA</strong> to provide hearing tests. If employers in theseindustries voluntarily conduct hearing tests they arerequired to record hearing loss cases meeting therecording criteria set forth in the final Section 1904.10rule.[67 FR 77169, Dec.17, 2002]D. Other Hearing Loss Issues<strong>OSHA</strong> would like to clarify three matters in relation torecording occupational hearing loss in conjunctionwith the Section 1904.10 final rule issued July 1,2002. First, the preamble to the final rule stated thatemployers in the shipbuilding industries are not coveredby <strong>OSHA</strong>’s noise standard Section 1910.95 andare therefore not required to perform audiometrictests. (67 FR 44038, 44040). This statement was anerror. <strong>OSHA</strong> Directive STD 0.2 Identification ofGeneral Industry Safety and Health Standards (29CFR 1910) Applicable to Shipyard Work specificallystates that employers in the shipbuilding industrythat are covered by the 29 CFR part 1915 Standardsare required to comply with a number of 29 CFR Part1910 standards, including the Section 1910.95 requirementsfor occupational noise.[67 FR 44038-44044, July 1, 2002]II. Recording Occupational Hearing Loss Cases(continued)One of the major issues in the recordkeeping rulemakingwas to determine the level of occupationalhearing loss that constitutes a health condition seri -ous enough to warrant recording. This was necessarybecause the final rule no longer requires recording ofminor or insignificant health conditions that do notresult in one or more of the general recording criteriasuch as medical treatment, restricted work, or days<strong>OSHA</strong> RECORDKEEPINGaway from work (See, e.g., 66 FR 5931). In its 1996Federal Register notice <strong>OSHA</strong> proposed a requirementto record hearing loss averaging 15 dB at 2000,3000 and 4000 Hz in one or both ears (61 FR 4040).<strong>OSHA</strong> adopted the lower 10-dB threshold in the finalrule based in part upon comments that “(a)n age-correctedSTS is a large hearing change that can affectcommunicative competence” (66 FR 6008).<strong>OSHA</strong>’s DecisionFollowing consideration of the comments received inresponse to the July 3, 2001 proposal to modify thehearing loss recording criteria, <strong>OSHA</strong> has decided torequire employers to record audiometric results indicatinga Standard Threshold Shift (STS) only whensuch STS cases also reflect a total hearing level of atleast 25 dB from audiometric zero. The STS calculationuses audiometric results averaged over the frequencies2000, 3000 and 4000 Hz, using the originalbaseline and annual audiograms required by the<strong>OSHA</strong> noise standard Section 1910.95. The rule alsoallows the employer to adjust the employee’s audiogramresults used to determine an STS to subtracthearing loss caused by aging, allows the employer toretest the workers’ hearing to make sure the hearingloss is persistent, and allows the employer to seekand follow the advice of a physician or licensedhealth care professional in determining whether ornot the hearing loss was work-related.The approach adopted in the final rule has severaladvantages. By using the STS definition from the<strong>OSHA</strong> noise standard Section 1910.95, the Section1904.10 regulation uses a sensitive measure of hearingloss that has occurred while the employee isemployed by his or her current employer. By requiringall STSs to exceed 25 dB from audiometric zero,the regulation assures that all recorded hearing lossesare significant illnesses. <strong>OSHA</strong> received no commentssuggesting that a shift of 25 dB from audiometriczero was anything less than a serious hearingloss case. While there is little consensus among thecommenters concerning the appropriate level thatshould be used to record hearing loss cases, there iswidespread agreement that a 25-dB shift from audiometriczero is a serious hearing loss.The hearing loss recording level is also compatiblewith the final rule’s definition of injury or illness,“an abnormal condition or disorder” (Section1904.46). Various scales used to rate hearing lossconsider hearing levels less than 25 dB to be withinthe “normal range” (American Medical AssociationGuidelines to the evaluation of Material Impairment,American Academy of Family Physicians, AudiologyHANDBOOK89§1904.10
- 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 10 and 11:
§1904.0…OSHA has rejected the su
- Page 12 and 13:
§1904.1Since publication of the re
- Page 14 and 15:
§1904.2SIC code Industry descripti
- Page 16 and 17:
§1904.2tinue to have injury and il
- Page 18 and 19:
Section 1904.3Keeping records for m
- Page 20 and 21:
PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Section 1904.4
- Page 22 and 23:
(viii)(ix)The illness is the common
- Page 24 and 25:
§1904.5employment environment. For
- Page 26 and 27:
§1904.5the employee’s status as
- Page 28 and 29:
§1904.5Exceptions Proposed but Not
- Page 30 and 31:
§1904.5pain and swelling in a join
- Page 32 and 33:
§1904.5the worker has taken a side
- Page 34 and 35:
§1904.526“Personal tasks” for
- Page 36 and 37:
If the accident had occurred in a l
- Page 38 and 39:
Scenario 4:• An employee reports
- Page 40 and 41:
In applying [the presumption of wor
- Page 42 and 43:
Letters of interpretation related t
- Page 44 and 45:
November 19, 2002Joseph Woodward, E
- Page 46 and 47: Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 48 and 49: §1904.6that the two injuries or il
- Page 50 and 51: §1904.6…Under the OSHA recordkee
- Page 52 and 53: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section
- Page 54 and 55: Since the employee was not performi
- Page 56 and 57: In each of the eight scenarios in y
- Page 58 and 59: §1904.7other licensed health care
- Page 60 and 61: §1904.7that eliminates the routine
- Page 62 and 63: §1904.7pose. This paragraph also s
- Page 64 and 65: §1904.7Counting Lost Workdays When
- Page 66 and 67: §1904.7tors to such injuries and i
- Page 68 and 69: §1904.7This list of first aid trea
- Page 70 and 71: §1904.7visit to a health care prof
- Page 72 and 73: §1904.7However, as discussed above
- Page 74 and 75: §1904.766immediate recording of si
- Page 76 and 77: §1904.7strength? How is an employe
- Page 78 and 79: §1904.7or illness. The severity of
- Page 80 and 81: The first treatment is glue used to
- Page 82 and 83: Response: The employer would have t
- Page 84 and 85: Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 86 and 87: Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 88 and 89: §1904.8exposure” as these terms
- Page 90 and 91: ing blood and other potentially inf
- Page 92 and 93: standard. In some cases employers v
- Page 94 and 95: PART 1904—[AMENDED] (67 FR 77170,
- Page 98 and 99: §1904.1090OSHA RECORDKEEPINGAwaren
- Page 100 and 101: §1904.1092reasonable checks agains
- Page 102 and 103: §1904.1094determination. Second, t
- Page 104 and 105: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section
- Page 106 and 107: Also, from time to time we update o
- Page 108 and 109: §1904.11Section 1904.11Recording c
- Page 110 and 111: §1904.11of causation applies to th
- Page 112 and 113: §1904.12Thus, the total MSD count
- Page 114 and 115: §1904.12current survey was designe
- Page 116 and 117: §1904.29son’s blood or other pot
- Page 118 and 119: §1904.29cern cases, and the list m
- Page 120 and 121: §1904.29have also been designed to
- Page 122 and 123: §1904.29with that entry and employ
- Page 124 and 125: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section
- Page 126 and 127: Section 1904.29(b)(10). In addition
- Page 128 and 129: Section 1904.30Multiple business es
- Page 130 and 131: fest themselves quickly and can be
- Page 132 and 133: §1904.31The term “employee” me
- Page 134 and 135: §1904.31companies, and other tempo
- Page 136 and 137: Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 138 and 139: Scenario 5:• An employee drives i
- Page 140 and 141: Response: The log is to be kept for
- Page 142 and 143: Section 1904.32Annual summary(66 FR
- Page 144 and 145: §1904.32The company executive cert
- Page 146 and 147:
Deletions from the former rule....F
- Page 148 and 149:
I do want to make one further point
- Page 150 and 151:
sede any longer retention periods s
- Page 152 and 153:
Response: The controlling employer
- Page 154 and 155:
Section 1904.35Employee involvement
- Page 156 and 157:
§1904.351904 regulation to provide
- Page 158 and 159:
§1904.35tions on employees’ and
- Page 160 and 161:
employee, the employer must provide
- Page 162 and 163:
Thank you for your interest in occu
- Page 164 and 165:
Letter of interpretation related to
- Page 166 and 167:
Section 1904.36Prohibition against
- Page 168 and 169:
and section 1952.4 spells out the r
- Page 170 and 171:
§1904.38Section 1904.38Variances f
- Page 172 and 173:
§1904.38cited and the citation is
- Page 174 and 175:
§1904.39PREAMBLE DISCUSSION: Secti
- Page 176 and 177:
§1904.39FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
- Page 178 and 179:
§1904.40maintains the records at a
- Page 180 and 181:
June 23, 2003Mr. Edwin G. Foulke, J
- Page 182 and 183:
Section 1904.41Annual OSHA injury a
- Page 184 and 185:
Section 1904.42Requests from the Bu
- Page 186 and 187:
Section 1904.43Summary and posting
- Page 188 and 189:
Section 1904.44Retention and updati
- Page 190 and 191:
Section 1904.45OMB control numbers
- Page 192 and 193:
allows him or her to independently
- Page 194 and 195:
§1904.46the three criteria above,
- Page 196 and 197:
§1904.46approach will provide an i
- Page 198 and 199:
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Section
- Page 200 and 201:
Section 1952.4Injury and illness re