# Presentation: 282632

## Moving to 29 CFR Part 1904

- How the Transition from
- 29 CFR Part 1960 to 1904
- Requirements Will Affect Federal
- Record Keepers

- John Hancock
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
- August 5-7, 2003

**Notes:**
Although the movement from 1960 to 1904 recordkeeping programs does not change an employee’s eligibility to FECA benefits, it will significantly change the way agencies maintain their records for safety and workers’ compensation programs.

This is particularly important since under Part 1960 OFAP and Federal agencies have traditionally utilized workers’ compensation records as the basis for Federal recordkeeping.  

Under the new Federal agency requirements, Federal agencies will have to maintain separate recordkeeping systems from FECA (or modify their existing systems) to accommodate the new OSHA logs and reporting requirements.  In any case, you will be asked to provide – or not provide – information on injuries and illnesses for the new record keeping system.

I’m going to review a number of differences between the 1960 and 1904 requirements to illustrate the changes in recordkeeping requirements.  I’ll then review a few OSHA Interpretation Letters the also highlight these differences.  Then we’ll open the floor for questions and comments.

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record

**Notes:**
Location of Injury v. station of record

Injuries are to be logged to the duty station at which the injury occurred.  If an employee’s permanent duty station is Washington, DC and they are injured while on TDY at the San Francisco Regional Office, the San Francisco regional office shall maintain that injury on their logs.

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record
- Return to duty and medical documentation

**Notes:**
Return to duty and medical documentation 

If the attending physician reports that the employee can return to work and the employee does not return, the log should reflect that the day away from work count has ended on the date the physician recommends.

If an employee returns to work and the attending physician reports that the employee should not return, the log should reflect the days away from work recommended by the physician.

If an employee is put on restricted duty, but performs all their duties anyway, employee must still be recorded as on restricted duty.

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record
- Return to duty and medical documentation
- Voluntary participation in wellness program

**Notes:**
Voluntary participation in a wellness program, medical, fitness, or recreational activity

1904 does not require recording if the injury results solely from voluntary participation in a wellness program or in a medical, fitness, or recreational activity such as blood donation, physical examination, flu shot, exercise class, racquetball, or baseball.

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record
- Return to duty and medical documentation
- Voluntary participation in wellness program
- Eating, drinking or preparing food for personal consumption

**Notes:**
Eating, drinking, or preparing food  for personal consumption

The injury or illness is solely the result of an employee eating, drinking, or preparing food for personal consumption; whether bought on premises or brought in) (I.e., choking on sandwich would not be considered work-related)

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record
- Return to duty and medical documentation
- Voluntary participation in wellness program
- Eating, drinking or preparing food for personal consumption
- TDY and “homes away from home”

**Notes:**
TDY and “homes away from home”

We’re used to entering injured employees on the OSHA 200 Log from the moment they step out their front door to the moment they return (relay example of employee falling down steps as they left for TDY)

Under 1904 Injuries or illnesses that occur while on TDY do NOT have to be recorded when:

Employee establishes a “home away from home” (i.e., checks into hotel for one or more days)

Must evaluate the employee’s activities after checking into the hotel/temp residence as you evaluate the non-traveling employee.  The same commuting rules between hotel & workplace apply as at home.

Employee makes personal detour from a reasonable direct route of travel.

Work at home

Depends on what the employee was doing at the time of the injury.
Not covered ex:	Fell over dog rushing to answer work call
			poked with sewing needle

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record
- Return to duty and medical documentation
- Voluntary participation in wellness program
- Eating, drinking or preparing food for personal consumption
- TDY and “homes away from home”
- Personal tasks at work after duty hours

**Notes:**
Personal tasks at work after duty hours

If the injury is solely the result of an employee doing personal tasks (unrelated to their employment) at the establishment outside of duty hours the case would not be recordable under 1904, but would probably be compensable under FECA due to the scope of employment provision.

## Comparison Review

- Location of injury v. station of record
- Return to duty and medical documentation
- Voluntary participation in wellness program
- Eating, drinking or preparing food for personal consumption
- TDY and “homes away from home”
- Personal tasks at work after duty hours

## Comparison Review

- Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted  injuries

**Notes:**
Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted 

Again, what once was considered “in the scope of the workplace” is now not considered work related.  If an employee burns themselves with a blow dryer in the fitness center, that is not now considered a log-able event.

## Comparison Review

- Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted  injuries
- Parking lot and access road accidents

**Notes:**
Parking lot and access road accidents

Entering parking lots during morning and evening commutes is no longer considered within the scope of employment for OSHA record keeping purposes, even though OWCP still considers the event compensable.

## Comparison Review

- Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted  injuries
- Parking lot and access road accidents
- Needlesticks

**Notes:**
Needlesticks

You must record all work-related needlestick injuries and cuts from sharp objects that are contaminated with another person’s blood or other potentially infectious material.  
Do not enter the employee’s name on the log for privacy reasons
Infectious materials is defined in the OSHA Bloodborne Pathogens standard at 1910.1030(b)
Human bodily fluids, tissues and organs, and
Other materials infected with the HIV or hepatitis B (HBV) virus such as lab cultures or tissues from experimental animals

If the cut, laceration, or scratch involves a clean object, or a contaminant other than blood or other potentially infectious material, you need to record the case only if it meets one or more of the recording criteria in 1904.7

If the employee is later diagnosed with an infectious bloodborne disease, you need to update the OSHA 300 log with an entry for the event if the case results in death, days away from work, restricted work, or job transfer.

You must also update the description to ID the infectious disease and change the classification of the case from an injury to an illness.

## Comparison Review

- Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted  injuries
- Parking lot and access road accidents
- Needlesticks
- Visits to health care solely for observation and diagnostic procedures

**Notes:**
Visits to health care solely for observation and diagnostic procedures

"Medical treatment" means the management and care of a patient to combat disease or disorder. For the purposes of Part 1904, medical treatment does not include visits to a physician or other licensed health care professional solely for observation or counseling

We’ll talk a little more about this in the first aid section

## Comparison Review

- Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted  injuries
- Parking lot and access road accidents
- Needlesticks
- Visits to health care solely for observation and diagnostic procedures
- Injury day count “cap”

**Notes:**
Injury day count “cap”

Is there a limit to the number of days away from work I must count? Yes, you may "cap" the total days away at 180 calendar days. You are not required to keep track of the number of calendar days away from work if the injury or illness resulted in more than 180 calendar days away from work and/or days of job transfer or restriction. In such a case, entering 180 in the total days away column will be considered adequate.

May I stop counting days if an employee who is away from work because of an injury or illness retires or leaves my company? Yes, if the employee leaves your company for some reason unrelated to the injury or illness, such as retirement, a plant closing, or to take another job, you may stop counting days away from work or days of restriction/job transfer. If the employee leaves your company because of the injury or illness, you must estimate the total number of days away or days of restriction/job transfer and enter the day count on the 300 Log.

If a case occurs in one year but results in days away during the next calendar year, do I record the case in both years?  No, you only record the injury or illness once. You must enter the number of calendar days away for the injury or illness on the OSHA 300 Log for the year in which the injury or illness occurred.  If the employee is still away from work because of the injury or illness when you prepare the annual summary, estimate the total number of calendar days you expect the employee to be away from work, use this number to calculate the total for the annual summary, and then update the initial log entry later when the day count is known or reaches the 180-day cap.

Let’s not even talk about the fiscal year, chargeback year, calendar year issue!

## Comparison Review

- Personal grooming, self-medicating for non-work related condition, intentionally self-inflicted  injuries
- Parking lot and access road accidents
- Needlesticks
- Visits to health care solely for observation and diagnostic procedures
- Injury day count “cap”

## Comparison Review

- Expanded definition of first aid

**Notes:**
The definition of first aid is considerably changed under 1904.  Procedures that would be considered recordable under 1960 are not recordable under 1904.  For the purposes of Part 1904, "first aid" means the following:
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(A) Using a non-prescription medication at nonprescription strength (for medications available in both prescription and non-prescription form, a recommendation by a physician or other licensed health care professional to use a non-prescription medication at prescription strength is considered medical treatment for recordkeeping purposes);
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(B) Administering tetanus immunizations (other immunizations, such as Hepatitis B vaccine or rabies vaccine, are considered medical treatment);
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(C) Cleaning, flushing or soaking wounds on the surface of the skin;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(D) Using wound coverings such as bandages, Band-AidsTM, gauze pads, etc.; or using butterfly bandages or Steri-StripsTM (other wound closing devices such as sutures, staples, etc., are considered medical treatment);
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(E) Using hot or cold therapy;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(F) Using any non-rigid means of support, such as elastic bandages, wraps, non-rigid back belts, etc. (devices with rigid stays or other systems designed to immobilize parts of the body are considered medical treatment for recordkeeping purposes);
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(G) Using temporary immobilization devices while transporting an accident victim (e.g., splints, slings, neck collars, back boards, etc.).
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(H) Drilling of a fingernail or toenail to relieve pressure, or draining fluid from a blister;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(I) Using eye patches;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(J) Removing foreign bodies from the eye using only irrigation or a cotton swab;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(K) Removing splinters or foreign material from areas other than the eye by irrigation, tweezers, cotton swabs or other simple means;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(L) Using finger guards;
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(M) Using massages (physical therapy or chiropractic treatment are considered medical treatment for recordkeeping purposes); or
1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(N) Drinking fluids for relief of heat stress.
1904.7(b)(5)(iii) Are any other procedures included in first aid? No, this is a complete list of all treatments considered first aid for Part 1904 purposes.

## Comparison Review

- Expanded definition of first aid
- Medical surveillance removal

**Notes:**
Medical surveillance removal.  If an employee is medically removed under the medical surveillance requirements of an OSHA standard, you must record the case on the OSHA 300 Log.

1904.9(b)(1) How do I classify medical removal cases on the OSHA 300 Log? You must enter each medical removal case on the OSHA 300 Log as either a case involving days away from work or a case involving restricted work activity, depending on how you decide to comply with the medical removal requirement. If the medical removal is the result of a chemical exposure, you must enter the case on the OSHA 300 Log by checking the "poisoning" column.
1904.9(b)(2) Do all of OSHA's standards have medical removal provisions? No, some OSHA standards, such as the standards covering bloodborne pathogens and noise, do not have medical removal provisions. Many OSHA standards that cover specific chemical substances have medical removal provisions. These standards include, but are not limited to, lead, cadmium, methylene chloride, formaldehyde, and benzene.
1904.9(b)(3) Do I have to record a case where I voluntarily removed the employee from exposure before the medical removal criteria in an OSHA standard are met? No, if the case involves voluntary medical removal before the medical removal levels required by an OSHA standard, you do not need to record the case on the OSHA 300 Log.

## Comparison Review

- Expanded definition of first aid
- Medical surveillance removal

## Comparison Review

- Expanded definition of first aid
- Medical surveillance removal
- Non appropriated fund employees

**Notes:**
Non appropriated fund employees	

I.e., Veterans Canteen Service

## Comparison Review

- Expanded definition of first aid
- Medical surveillance removal
- Non appropriated fund employees

## Significant Interpretation Letters

- Do the results of an MRI negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation.?

**Notes:**
03/19/2003 - Results of an MRI do not negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation. 

an employee who sustained a work-related bruise on his knee was told by a physician not to return to work until undergoing an MRI, and that the employee was off work for some days before the procedure could be performed. You record the case based on the days away from work, and ask whether the entry may now be lined out because the MRI showed that no OSHA recordable injury occurred.
 The case was properly recorded based on the physician's recommendation that the employee not return to work before undergoing an MRI for his bruised knee. 

OSHA requires employers to follow the physician's or HCP's recommendation when recording a case. For purposes of OSHA recordkeeping, the case met the criteria in section 1904.7 at the time of recording because the employee had sustained a work-related injury--a bruised knee--involving one or more days away from work. The subsequent MRI results do not change these facts. Accordingly, the MRI results are not a basis to line out the entry. 

## Significant Interpretation Letters

- Do the results of an MRI negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation.?
- Is administration of O2 medical treatment?

**Notes:**
11/19/2002 - Clarification on determining if an injury or illness is work-related and the recordability of the administration of oxygen. 
If oxygen is given by emergency response personnel on the way to the hospital, is that considered to be OSHA recordable, if he does not have any medical treatment at the hospital?

A case is recordable if an employee with a work-related injury or illness is given oxygen in an ambulance on the way to the hospital, even though no further medical treatment is provided at the hospital. I believe that this information is accurate as it stands. 

The rationale is that employees must have sustained an injury or illness, as defined by the recordkeeping rule, before the administration of oxygen, or any other medical treatment, and that makes the case recordable. 

## Significant Interpretation Letters

- Do the results of an MRI negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation.?
- Is administration of O2 medical treatment?
- Is the use of liquid bandages  considered first aid?

**Notes:**
08/08/2002 - Use of liquid bandages on wounds is considered first aid. 

Is an injury and illness case which resulted in treatment with Band-Aid Brand Liquid Bandage considered first aid or medical treatment?

The concept that underlies the medical treatment vs. first aid distinction made between this type of treatment centers around the basic difference between wound closures and wound coverings. 

The recordkeeping rule defines first aid under section 1904.7(b)(5)(ii)(D), Using wound coverings, such as bandages, Band-Aids, gauze pads, etc.; or using butterfly bandages or Steri-strips (other wound closing devices, such as sutures, staples, etc. are considered medical treatment). 

Therefore, the use of wound coverings, like Band-Aid Brand Liquid Bandage is deemed to be first aid treatment. 

## Significant Interpretation Letters

- Do the results of an MRI negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation.?
- Is administration of O2 medical treatment?
- Is the use of liquid bandages  considered first aid?
- If a follow up hearing test shows  hearing his improved above the recordable level, can I change the 300 log?

**Notes:**
08/08/2002 - Recording criteria for recordkeeping cases involving occupational hearing loss. 
Can I correct my OSHA 300 Log if on a subsequent exam an employee's hearing improves to a point that is no longer recordable? If subsequent audiometric testing indicates that a Standard Threshold Shift (STS) is not persistent, you may erase or line-out the recorded entry.

Although OSHA does not require another audiogram to insure the "improvement" you describe is actual, it would be prudent for an employer to do so. However, should hearing loss return at the next audiogram, the employer should correct the original records and not treat the subsequent hearing loss as a new case. 

## Significant Interpretation Letters

- Do the results of an MRI negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation.?
- Is administration of O2 medical treatment?
- Is the use of liquid bandages  considered first aid?
- If a follow up hearing test shows  hearing his improved above the recordable level, can I change the 300 log?
- If an employee is issued a prescription and doesn’t fill it, is the case recordable?

**Notes:**
10/29/2001 - Recording of cases in which a health care professional issues a prescription, whether that prescription is filled or not. 

OSHA maintains its longstanding policy of requiring the recording of cases in which a health care professional issues a prescription, whether that prescription is filled or not. Medical treatment includes treatment that is used as well as those that should have been used. 

The patient's acceptance or refusal of the treatment does not alter the fact that, in the health care professional's judgement, the case warranted a script for the issuance of prescription medicine. 

For these reasons, the new recordkeeping rule continues OSHA's longstanding policy of considering the use of prescription medication as medical treatment, regardless of the reason it is prescribed. 

## Significant Interpretation Letters

- Do the results of an MRI negate the recordability of a physician's recommendation.?
- Is administration of O2 medical treatment?
- Is the use of liquid bandages  considered first aid?
- If a follow up hearing test shows  hearing his improved above the recordable level, can I change the 300 log?
- If an employee is issued a prescription and doesn’t fill it, is the case recordable?

## Questions/Comments?