The Secretary of Labor’s Report to the President 

on the Status of Federal Agencies’ 

Occupational Safety and Health Programs

Calendar Year 

2018
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface ______________________________________________________________2

Executive Summary ____________________________________________________3

OSHA Activities _________________________________________________________________ 3

Agency Activities ________________________________________________________________ 5

The Secretary’s Report to the President ____________________________________10

Section 1 - OSHA Activities _____________________________________________11

Enforcement____________________________________________________________________ 11

Oversight ______________________________________________________________________ 14

Compliance Assistance ___________________________________________________________ 23

Section 2 – Federal Agency OSH Activities _________________________________27

Fatalities, Hospitalizations, and Amputations __________________________________________ 27

Certified Safety and Health Committees ______________________________________________ 31

Other OSH Committees and Councils________________________________________________ 32

Analyzing and Controlling Hazards _________________________________________________ 33

Motor Vehicle Safety_____________________________________________________________ 34

Management Response to Safety and Health Inspections _________________________________ 38

Federal Employees Overseas_______________________________________________________ 39

OSH Training and Resources ______________________________________________________ 41

Whistleblower Protection Programs _________________________________________________ 41

Product Safety Programs __________________________________________________________ 41

Specific Agency Reporting Programs ________________________________________________ 42

Appendices __________________________________________________________44

Appendix 1: Status of Agency Injury and Illness Record Reporting ________________________ 45

Appendix 2: Field Federal Safety and Health Councils __________________________________ 49

Appendix 3: Agency Requests to NIOSH for Technical Assistance_________________________ 59

Appendix 4: Fatality/Hospitalization/Amputation Incident Summary_______________________ 62
2

PREFACE

This report fulfills the Secretary of Labor’s annual responsibility, as set forth in Section 19(b) of the 

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the Act), to inform the President about the status of 

federal agencies’ Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) programs and the accidents and injuries that 

occurred at federal worksites. The report provides an analysis of the reports each agency submitted to 

the Secretary. It also describes the activities that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

(OSHA) conducted at or with federal agencies during Calendar Year (CY) 2018. 

Agency heads must establish and provide guidance on their OSH programs, as well as report on the 

status of these programs, as mandated by:

 Section 19(a) of the Act (29 United States Code (U.S.C.) §668(a)), which directs “the head of 

each Federal agency to establish and maintain an effective and comprehensive occupational 

safety and health program which is consistent with the occupational safety and health standards 

promulgated under Section 6 [of the Act (29 U.S.C. § 655)].”

 Section 19(a)(5) of the Act (29 U.S.C. §668(a)(5)), which requires federal agency heads to 

“make an annual report to the Secretary with respect to occupational accidents and injuries and 

the agency’s program under this section.” 

 Presidential Executive Order (E.O.) 12196, Occupational Safety and Health Programs for 

Federal Employees, which guides the heads of federal Executive Branch agencies in 

implementing Section 19 of the Act and directs the Secretary to issue a set of basic program 

elements to assist the various federal agencies in carrying out their responsibilities.

 Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §1960, Basic Program Elements for Federal 

Employee Occupational Safety and Health Programs and Related Matters, which establishes 

the requirements for agency heads to implement OSH programs in their respective agencies.

The Act, E.O. 12196, and 29 CFR §1960 require the heads of federal agencies to submit annual reports 

on their OSH programs to the Secretary. According to 29 CFR §1960.71(a)(1), the report is due to 

OSHA, annually, no later than May 1.
3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report describes the steps that OSHA and federal agencies took in CY 2018 to ensure the safety 

and health of federal employees. The report also summarizes the information that federal Executive 

Branch agencies provided to OSHA in their annual reports and includes the injury and illness rates for 

federal Executive Branch employees. 

The report explains how the Executive Branch departments and agencies sought to improve workplace 

safety and health in CY 2018. The report describes how federal agencies analyzed trends and 

improved their programs to assess the government’s trends and overall progress toward improving 

worker safety and health. 

Annual Report Requirement

Section 19(a)(5) of the Act requires each Executive Branch agency to submit an annual report to the 

Secretary. The annual report must address occupational accidents, injuries, and illnesses, as well as 

include details on the agency’s program for providing safe and healthful working conditions. The

report should also assess the effectiveness of the agency’s OSH program. 

Reporting Federal Agency Injury and Illness Information Requirement

Per 29 CFR §1960.72(a), each agency must submit to the Secretary by May 1 of each year all 

information included on the agency’s previous calendar year’s occupational injury and illness 

recordkeeping forms. The information submitted must include all data entered on OSHA Form 300, 

Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses (or equivalent); OSHA Form 301, Injury and Illness 

Incident Report (or equivalent); and OSHA Form 300A, Summary of Work-Related Injuries and 

Illnesses (or equivalent).

OSHA Activities

OSHA engaged in a wide range of enforcement, oversight, and compliance assistance activities to 

address OSH-related issues at federal agencies. Enforcement activities primarily focused on 

inspections of federal worksites to identify violations of OSHA standards and to monitor agencies’ 

injury and illness rates. Oversight consisted of calculating quarterly injury and illness rates and 

assessing agencies OSH programs through the annual report submissions. Compliance assistance 

activities included consulting with federal agencies, explaining the importance of providing safe and 

healthy working environments, and highlighting the best practices or methods to help agencies 

accomplish this goal. 

Enforcement

During CY 2018, OSHA conducted 269 programmed inspections and 348 unprogrammed inspections 

at federal workplaces. On average, each programmed inspection identified 1.81 violations and each 

unprogrammed inspection identified 0.83 violations. OSHA inspected federal agencies under a variety 

of national and local emphasis programs targeting specific hazards (such as combustible dust or 

exposure to hexavalent chromium) and types of industries (such as nursing or maritime). Under the 

Federal Agency Targeting Inspection Program (FEDTARG), OSHA specifically targeted federal 

agency establishments with high injury and illness rates. Compared to CY 2017, in CY 2018 OSHA 

programmed inspection activity decreased while unprogrammed inspections increased, federal agency 

compliance increased, and the average number of violations per inspection decreased. In addition, 

OSHA issued 10 federal agency significant/novel cases in CY 2018. Of the 10 cases, four involved the 

Department of Defense (DoD), three involved the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), two involved 
4

the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and one involved the Department of Justice (DOJ). 

Oversight

OSHA continued to calculate injury and illness rates quarterly, allowing agencies to track these results 

along with other measures to help assess their OSH programs. OSHA also tracked the workers’ 

compensation costs to document financial impact of federal worker injuries and illnesses. In addition, 

OSHA’s annual report request to federal agencies provided agencies with the opportunity to assess and 

improve their OSH programs. 

OSHA calculates injury and illness incidence rates for individual agencies by using fiscal year (FY) 

injury and illness claims data reported to the Department of Labor’s (DOL), Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs (OWCP), together with the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM)

employment data.1 In FY 2018, federal government employment decreased by 7,675 (1 percent) to 

2,160,305 employees. The total injury and illness cases decreased by 1,729 to 41,705 (4 percent) and 

the total case rate decreased from 2.00 occurrences per 100 workers to 1.93 occurrences per 100 

workers (4 percent). The government’s lost-time cases decreased by 886 to 22,365 (4 percent) and the 

lost-time case rate decreased from 1.07 occurrences per 100 workers to 1.04 occurrences per 100 

workers (3 percent).

The Federal Employment Compensation Act (FECA) costs for chargeback year (CBY) 2018 were 

approximately $1.5 billion as compared to CBY 2017 ($1.5 billion), CBY 2016 ($1.6 billion), and 

CBY 2015 ($1.6 billion). Workers’ compensation benefits provided to employees include payments 

for medical treatment, rehabilitation services, replacement of lost wages, and compensation benefits to 

their survivors in cases of death.

For CY 2018, OSHA asked agencies to rate the operations, management, and culture components of 

their OSH programs using a seven-question (attribute) tool. The tool asks agencies questions about 

how the agency fulfills specific requirements of 29 CFR §1960 and E.O. 12196, 13043, and 13513. 

The data indicate that most federal agencies meet the program requirements of 29 CFR §1960 for an

effective OSH program. Overall, agencies’ ratings of the three components reflect an improvement in 

their programs. Agencies reported improving numerous program elements by providing employees 

with more opportunities to participate in all aspects of the program including hazard reporting, 

defining safe work practices, and conducting site inspections. Agencies also reported that individuals 

with assigned safety and health responsibilities had the authority to perform their duties including

implementing OSH rules and using the necessary funds and resources to abate workplace hazards. 

Despite the overall success of agencies’ OSH programs, most agencies identified areas for 

improvement. The analysis also indicated that a small number of agencies were not fully aware of 

their OSH responsibilities or how to implement all the attributes of an effective OSH program in 

government operations. 

During this reporting period, OSHA received complete injury and illness data from 59 of 95 agencies 

(62 percent) and partial data from an additional 24 agencies (25 percent). The most common errors 

were failures to provide the number of employees or hours worked for each establishment. OSHA will 

analyze the collected data for key findings and the collection process for lessons learned to further 

streamline and simplify the procedure. 

 

1 OWCP data are available only on an FY basis.
5

Compliance Assistance

OSHA uses a variety of methods to assist federal agencies in their efforts to improve worker safety and 

health to include: responding to federal agency technical assistance requests (ATARs), encouraging 

agencies’ participation in the Secretary’s Field Federal Safety and Health Councils (FFSHCs), and 

providing agencies with OSH training opportunities.

ATARs are consultative services available only to federal agencies. Similar to OSHA’s Consultation 

Program for private-sector employers, ATARs may include hazard abatement advice, training, 

consultation visits, or OSH program assistance. While an ATAR is not an enforcement inspection, 

agencies that request assistance are expected to correct all violations of citable program elements under 

29 CFR §1960 or other OSHA standards observed during the visit. During CY 2018, OSHA 

conducted 10 ATARs at the request of VA, Consumer Product Safety Commission, USDA, and DOL. 

FFSHCs are federal interagency groups, chartered by the Secretary, that enable local OSH 

professionals to share knowledge and resources. In CY 2018, 31 FFSHCs actively carried out efforts 

to improve the effectiveness of OSH functions within the government. According to the annual reports 

submitted by FFSHCs to OSHA during CY 2018, 34 departments and agencies participated in council 

activities and more than 2,000 federal employees attended meetings and/or council-provided training. 

Each year, OSHA assesses the work of the councils so that the Secretary can recognize the most 

successful. In CY 2018, the Secretary recognized 11 FFSHCs for their efforts to promote the 

advancement of OSH in the federal government. 

Under 29 CFR §1960.17, if an agency cannot comply with an applicable OSHA standard, it may 

request an alternate standard to ensure appropriate protection for affected employees. An alternate 

standard is the federal agency equivalent of a private-sector variance from OSHA standards. 

Currently, there are six OSHA-approved alternate standards that address air traffic control towers, 

special-purpose ladders, lifting devices, diving standards, weight-handling equipment, and gas-free 

engineering. Under 29 CFR §1960.18, if no OSHA standard exists for a specific working condition of 

federal agency employees, an agency must develop a supplementary standard for that working 

condition and provide the standard to OSHA. Currently, there are two supplementary standards; one 

addresses explosives, propellants, and pyrotechnics, and the other covers portable tank transport. 

OSHA did not approve any new alternate or supplementary standards in CY 2018.

OSHA provides federal agency OSH personnel with training opportunities through numerous venues, 

including the OSHA Training Institute (OTI). Federal OSH personnel may attend any of OTI’s 

professional and technical courses throughout the year. In addition, OSHA provides federal agency 

OSH personnel with a week of free training at OTI, commonly referred to as FEDWEEK. During the 

2018 FEDWEEK, OSHA provided nine half-day seminars, offered twice during the week, on topics 

chosen by federal OSH personnel. Ninety-eight federal employees attended these seminars and 

reported that they were pleased with the training offered. 

Agency Activities

Fatalities, Hospitalizations, and Amputations

The Act, provisions of 29 CFR §1960, and other regulations require employers, both private and 

public, to investigate, track, and promptly report incidents involving work-related fatalities, 
6

hospitalizations, and amputations2to OSHA. As shown in Table 1, for the CY 2018 reporting period, 

federal Executive Branch departments and independent agencies reported 19 civilian employee 

fatalities, 183 hospitalizations, and 25 amputations. Each reported incident is a singular event that may 

result in multiple outcomes (i.e., amputation resulting in a hospitalization). The classification 

hierarchy follows accordingly: fatality, amputation, hospitalization. For example, if an employee 

suffered an amputation that resulted in hospitalization, the incident is counted as an amputation. 

Table 1: Major Department / Agency incident outcome for CY 2018

Agency Fatalities Hospitalizations Amputations

Department of Agriculture 0 9 1

Department of Commerce 0 5 0

Department of Defense 5 49 9

Department of Energy 1 6 0

Department of Health and Human Services 1 2 0

Department of Homeland Security 2 44 0

Department of Justice 4 13 7

Department of Labor 0 1 4

Department of Veterans Affairs 2 15 2

Department of the Interior 3 32 0

Department of the Treasury 0 0 1

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 0 1 0

Federal Trade Commission 0 1 0

General Services Administration 1 0 0

Smithsonian Institute 0 4 0

Social Security Administration 0 0 1

Tennessee Valley Authority 0 1 0

Total 19 183 25

An overall incident cause analysis indicates that incidents related to falls and vehicles increased

between the reporting years of CY 2016 and CY 2017. Departments reported a 25 percent increase in 

falls including one that resulted in a fatality in CY 2018. Incidents related to motor vehicles increased 

83 percent in CY 2018. Hospitalizations and fatalities related to firearms increased 40 percent in CY 

2018. Heat-related incidents decreased by 29 percent in CY 2018. 

Certified Safety and Health Committees (CSHC)

Under 29 CFR §1960, Subpart F, any Executive Branch agency can form a certified safety and health 

committee (CSHC) to monitor and assist with the agency’s OSH program. Agencies with CSHCs 

must have committees at both the national and field/regional levels. The national-level committees 

provide policy guidance, while the local committees monitor and assist in the execution of the 

agency’s OSH policies. When appropriately implemented, an approved CSHC exempts agencies from 

unannounced OSHA inspections. During CY 2018, the following agencies maintained Secretaryapproved CSHCs: the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), DOL, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), 

and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Each agency provided information certifying to the 

Secretary that their respective CSHCs met Subpart F’s requirements. Most other agencies have 

 

2 On January 1, 2015, OSHA implemented a new reporting rule that requires employers to report an incident resulting in the 

hospitalization of one or more employees, rather than three or more employees. In addition, employers must report 

incidents that result in a loss of an eye or an amputation.
7

internal OSH committees not certified under Subpart F. 

Controlling Hazards

To determine how well agencies track workplace injuries, OSHA asked agencies to report on the most 

common causes of injuries and the efforts taken to mitigate those causes. Most agencies reported on 

their efforts to reduce employee slip, trip, and fall injuries or overexertion. To address these injuries, 

agencies implemented engineering and administrative controls to reduce or eliminate exposure. 

Several agencies reported installing slip-resistant flooring, improving lighting, and conducting 

ergonomic assessments. Agencies also conducted annual safety training classes and held agency-wide

meetings to improve awareness. In addition, several agencies reported participating in OSHA’s 

National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls held in May 2018. The purpose of the Stand-Down was 

to get employers to pause during the workday for topic discussions, demonstrations, and training on 

how to recognize related hazards and prevent falls. 

Motor Vehicle Safety

In the information request, OSHA asked agencies to provide details on their motor vehicle safety 

programs (MVSP) as well as any motor vehicle accidents that occurred during the reporting period. 

Most agencies reported having MVSPs that comply with the Executive Orders requiring the use of 

seatbelts in motor vehicles and preventing distracted driving. Several departments and agencies 

offered hands-on training to employees, such as defensive driving, while most others relied on training 

courses provided by either GSA or the National Safety Council. In CY 2018, 32 federal agencies 

reported that 11,321 motor vehicle accidents occurred.

Agency’s Self-Inspection of Safety and Health Program

Overall, federal agencies reported an improvement in the effectiveness of their self-inspections during 

CY 2018. Several agencies noted that their OSH program improvements were due to the number of 

self-inspections completed during the reporting period. Most agencies indicated that they conducted 

self-evaluations quarterly and that supervisors and employees, trained in hazard recognition, conducted 

these inspections. Several agencies reported that all workplaces were inspected during CY 2018. A 

few agencies indicated that their facilities were inspected by GSA, OSHA, or a federal contractor. 

Overall, agencies’ involvement in internal and external inspections included correcting minor issues on 

the spot, abating hazards as required by corrective action plans, and updating policy and/or procedural 

guidance to improve the effectiveness of their OSH programs. In CY 2018, 80 agencies oversaw selfinspection activities, with a few having the inspections conducted by outside sources. 

Federal Employee Training 

Agencies reported providing a wide range of training to their stateside employees. Agencies reported 

providing employee OSH training based on job responsibilities, and some agencies made special 

efforts to ensure that collateral duty OSH personnel received all appropriate training. Many agencies 

provided support by publishing information on their OSH websites and in their newsletters, 

encouraging OSH personnel to participate in local FFSHCs, and recognizing employees’ efforts with 

OSH awards. In addition, agencies supported employees participating in professional OSH 

organizations and pursuing OSH certifications. On a related note, several agencies supported 

employee safety and health by encouraging healthy lifestyles. For example, agencies provided 

employees with onsite fitness centers or subsidized gym memberships, sponsored health fairs, or 

offered health screenings and physical examinations.

The Act, E.O. 12196, and 29 CFR §1960 have no geographical limits. These regulations require 

agencies to provide safe and healthful workplaces to all federal civilian employees, including those 
8

who work outside U.S. borders. In CY 2018, 72,494 government employees worked overseas.3 

Agencies reported providing OSH coverage to their overseas employees through the DoD, the 

Department of State (DOS), or their own programs. All agencies described providing their employees 

with prophylactic immunizations, training, and pre-travel safety and health information prior to 

deployment. 

Whistleblower Protection Programs

In the CY 2018 information request to federal agencies, OSHA asked agencies to provide information 

on their whistleblower protection programs. As required by 29 CFR §1960, Subpart G, agencies must 

ensure that employees are not subjected to restraint, interference, coercion, discrimination, or reprisal 

for filing a report of unsafe or unhealthy working conditions. OSHA asked agencies to provide 

information on any federal employee allegations of reprisal as well as all actions taken in response to 

the allegations. Almost all agencies acknowledged their whistleblower responsibilities and reported 

having a well-designed protection program. In all, 85 agencies (98 percent) reported that they have 

functional whistleblower protection programs. During CY 2018, three agencies reported investigating 

allegations of reprisal. DOL, DOT, and the Smithsonian Institution investigated claims of reprisal, and 

all were found unsubstantiated.

Product Safety

In their CY 2018 reports, federal agencies described compliance with the provisions of 29 CFR 

§1960.34, which addresses conflicts that may exist in standards concerning federal buildings, leased 

space, products purchased or supplied, and other requirements affecting federal employee safety and 

health. In their reports, agencies addressed how they comply with the product safety requirements of 

the standard, including the use of safety data sheets (SDS), and whether the agency responded to 

product recalls. Sixty-six agencies (76 percent) reported being in compliance with the standard, while 

19 agencies (22 percent) indicated lacking such a program. Agencies without a product safety program 

reported that they did not use chemicals. Three agencies (3 percent) stated that the provision was 

inapplicable. OSHA contacts agencies stating a provision is inapplicable, and those that did not 

address the information request, to ensure awareness of their OSH responsibilities in this area. 

Accomplishments

Agencies reported on a broad range of OSH program improvements, such as revising existing policies, 

procedures, and manuals; implementing new training delivery systems; and instituting mandatory OSH 

training. In addition, agencies reported inspecting their facilities and establishments more frequently 

and incorporating risk assessment into their safety policies. While several agencies have invested 

considerable resources and developed robust OSH programs, a few agencies are still in the early stages 

of program development. These agencies are making great strides in developing OSH programs.

Agencies Failing to Submit Annual Reports

OSHA did not receive Section 19(a)(5) reports from the following nine agencies:

 AbilityOne

 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

 Corporation for National Community Service

 Department of Education

 DOS

 John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

 Millennium Challenge Corporation

 

3 The Department of State, which did not submit a CY 2018 report, reported close to 60,000 employees in CY 2017.
9

 Presidio Trust  Selective Service System
10

THE SECRETARY’S REPORT TO 

THE PRESIDENT
11

SECTION 1 - OSHA ACTIVITIES

This section discusses OSHA enforcement, oversight, and compliance assistance activities; 

significant/novel enforcement cases involving federal agencies; and agencies’ reports of selfevaluations using components of an integrated safety and health evaluation tool. In addition, this 

section contains information on recordkeeping, provides a summary of agency reports on fatalities and 

hospitalizations, and includes a brief description of the training opportunities OSHA provided solely to

federal OSH personnel. 

Enforcement

Inspections

OSHA is committed to strong, fair, and effective enforcement of safety and health requirements in the 

federal workplace. Through inspections, OSHA assesses agencies’ compliance with safety and health 

standards and the requirements of 29 CFR §1960, thus reducing the number of on-the-job hazards. 

OSHA inspections of federal workplaces parallel those conducted in the private sector. While

inspections can occur for many reasons, they generally fall into one of two categories: programmed or 

unprogrammed. OSHA performs programmed inspections to focus resources on and emphasize a 

particular safety or health issue, workplaces associated with specific hazards or adverse health 

outcomes/effects, and establishments where rates of injuries and illnesses exceed industry averages. 

Unprogrammed inspections occur for many reasons and are primarily in response to employee 

complaints about or notifications of serious hazards.

OSHA further categorizes inspections as related to either safety or health. Safety inspections focus on 

workplace issues such as means of egress, electrical hazards, machine guarding, or confined space 

entry procedures. Health inspections may focus on worker respiratory exposures to specific chemicals, 

dermal exposures to infectious disease agents, or to physical hazards such as occupational noise

exposure and ergonomics. During an inspection, if OSHA determines that safety and/or health hazards 

exist, OSHA documents the conditions and determines if those conditions violate an OSHA standard. 

For federal agencies, OSHA issues Notices of Unsafe or Unhealthful Working Conditions (Notices), 

which carry no monetary penalties. 

There are different types of violations, depending on the severity of the hazard or the agency’s 

response to the condition:

 De Minimis violations have no direct or immediate relationship to safety or health and do not 

result in citations.

 Other-Than-Serious violations capture hazards that cannot reasonably be predicted to cause 

death or serious physical harm to exposed employees, but do have a direct and immediate 

relationship to their safety and health.

 Serious violations are hazards that could cause injury or illness that would most likely result in 

death or serious physical harm to the employee(s).

 Willful violations exist under the Act where an employer has demonstrated either an intentional 

disregard for the requirements of the Act or a plain indifference to employee safety and health.

 Repeat violations occur when an employer has been cited previously for the same or a 

substantially similar condition or hazard and the Notice has become a final order.

 Failure-To-Abate violations occur when the agency has not corrected a violation for which 

OSHA has issued a Notice, and the abatement date has passed or is covered under a settlement 

agreement. A failure-to-abate also exists when the agency has not complied with interim 

measures involved in a long-term abatement within the given timeframe.
12

OSHA Inspection Activity

During CY 2018, OSHA conducted 269 programmed inspections and 348 unprogrammed inspections 

of federal worksites. Inspections averaged 1.81 violations per programmed inspection and 0.83

violations per unprogrammed inspection. OSHA found 76 percent of establishments receiving

programmed inspections not in compliance. Overall, OSHA identified 632 violations: 404 Serious, 82

Repeat, and 146 Other-Than-Serious. 

In CY 2018, OSHA continued to conduct programmed inspections that focus on specific federal 

agency establishments/hazards. As illustrated in Table 2, the number of programmed inspections 

decreased in CY 2018 as compared to the prior two years, and the average number of serious violations 

also decreased. While the number of unprogrammed inspections increased in CY 2018 as compared to 

the previous year, the average number of serious violations for those inspections also decreased. 

Table 2. OSHA Federal Agency Programmed, Unprogrammed Inspection Activity, CY 2016 through 

CY 2018.

CY 2018 CY 2017 CY 2016 

Programmed Inspections 269 509 349

Percent in Compliance 23.8 23 11

Average Number of Violations per Inspection 2.81 3.02 3.19

Serious, Willful, Repeat Violations 486 939 873

Average Number Serious, Willful, Repeat Violations 1.81 1.84 2.56

Un-programmed Inspections 348 318 365

Percent in Compliance 44.2 51 51

Average Number of Violations per Inspection 2.54 2.72 1.21

Serious, Willful, Repeat Violations 290 276 352

Average Number Serious, Willful, Repeat Violations 0.83 0.87 0.97

Total Inspections 617 827 714

Significant/Novel Cases

Significant cases carry penalties over $180,000, while novel cases involve specific enforcement issues. 

By law, OSHA cannot assess penalties against federal agencies, yet it can determine the significance of 

a federal agency case by comparing the violations to the penalties that would be assessed to a “similar” 

private-sector employer. 

OSHA issued 10 federal agency significant/novel case reports in CY 2018. Of the 10 cases, four 

involved the DoD, three involved VA, two involved USDA, and one involved DOJ (Table 3).

Table 3. Summary of OSHA Significant/Novel Cases Involving Federal Agencies.

Department/Agency 

Inspection 

Type 

Program Type of Violations 

DoD – Defense Command Agency

Region 3 – Norfolk, Virginia

Planned 

Program

Amputation 

Inspection

Willful: 1

Serious: 3

OSHA initiated this inspection following the reporting of an amputation injury.
13

Table 3. Summary of OSHA Significant/Novel Cases Involving Federal Agencies.

Department/Agency 

Inspection 

Type 

Program Type of Violations 

DoD – Department of Navy Fleet 

Readiness Center Mid-Atlantic 

Patuxent River

Region 3 – Patuxent River, Maryland

Un-Planned

Program 

Complaint 

Inspection

Willful: 3

Serious: 1

Other-Than-Serious: 1

OSHA initiated this inspection following a complaint alleging employee exposure to asbestos due to 

deteriorating pipe insulation.

DoD – Army and Air Force Exchange 

Service Selfridge Air National Guard 

Base

Region 5 – Mount Clemens, Michigan

Un-Planned 

Program 

Complaint 

Inspection

Repeat: 1

Other-Than-Serious: 1

OSHA initiated this inspection following a complaint related to forklift training and certification.

DoD – Army Reserve 63rd Readiness 

Division

Region 9 – Mountain View, California

Un-Planned 

Program 

Fatality 

Inspection

Serious: 2

Other-Than-Serious: 1 

OSHA initiated this inspection after the responding coroner informed OSHA about a work-related 

fatality that had occurred the previous day.

VA – Veterans Administration New 

Jersey Healthcare System

Region 2 – East Orange, New Jersey

Planned 

Program

Follow-up 

Inspection

Failure-to-Abate: 2

OSHA initiated this follow-up inspection after numerous unsuccessful attempts to obtain abatement 

verification for the original violation items.

VA – Veterans Administration Greater 

Los Angeles Healthcare System

Region 9 – Los Angeles, California

Planned 

Program 

FEDTARG Repeat: 5

 

OSHA initiated this inspection as a FEDTARG programmed planned inspection from the 2017 

targeting list.

VA – Tibor Rubin Veterans 

Administration Long Beach Medical 

Center

Region 9 – Long Beach, California

Planned 

Program 

FEDTARG Serious: 1

Repeat: 5

OSHA initiated this inspection as a FEDTARG programmed planned inspection from the 2017 

targeting list.

USDA – U.S. Forest Service Mount 

Hood National Forest

Region 10 – Sandy, Oregon

Planned 

Program

FEDSAFE

Local Emphasis

Serious: 5

Repeat: 6 

Other-Than-Serious: 4
14

Table 3. Summary of OSHA Significant/Novel Cases Involving Federal Agencies.

Department/Agency 

Inspection 

Type 

Program Type of Violations 

OSHA initiated this inspection as a programmed planned inspection under the FEDSAFE Local 

Emphasis Program.

USDA – U.S. Forest Service Glacier 

Ranger District

Region 10 – Girdwood, Arkansas

Planned 

Program

FEDSAFE 

Local Emphasis

Serious: 1

Repeat: 2

OSHA initiated this inspection as a programmed planned inspection under the FEDSAFE Local 

Emphasis Program.

DOJ – Bureau of Prisons Federal 

Correctional Complex Butner

Region 4 – Butner, North Carolina

Planned 

Program 

FEDTARG Serious: 8

Repeat: 5

Other-Than-Serious: 2

OSHA initiated this inspection as a FEDTARG programmed planned inspection from the 2017 

targeting list.

Oversight

Injury and Illness Statistics and Workers’ Compensation Costs

OSHA calculates injury and illness incidence rates for individual agencies by using FY injury and 

illness claims data reported to OWCP,4together with OPM’s employment data. In FY 2018, federal 

government employment decreased by 7,675 (1 percent) to 2,160,305 employees. The total injury and 

illness cases decreased by 1,729 to 41,705 (4 percent) and the total case rate decreased from 2.00

occurrences per 100 to 1.93 (4 percent). The Government’s lost-time cases decreased by 886 to 22,365 

(4 percent) and the lost-time case rate decreased from 1.07 occurrences per 100 to 1.04 (3 percent).

The FECA costs for CBY 2018 were approximately $1.5 billion compared to CBY 2017 ($1.5 billion),

CBY 2016 ($1.6 billion), and CBY 2015 ($1.6 billion). Workers’ compensation benefits provided to 

employees include payments for medical treatment, rehabilitation services, replacement of lost wages, 

and compensation benefits to their survivors in cases of death.

Evaluations

Based on the information gathered from federal agencies’ annual reports, OSHA evaluated agencies’ 

OSH programs, as required by 29 CFR §1960.80 and Section 1-401(h) of E.O. 12196. While federal 

operations and worksites are quite diverse, ranging from office spaces to construction sites, under 29 

CFR §1960, agencies are required to integrate OSH programs into organizational structures, take a

systematic approach to determine whether policies and procedures are appropriately developed and 

implemented, and develop and maintain safety and health management systems. Within this 

framework, OSHA can evaluate these diverse federal settings to determine if OSH program’s policies 

and procedures are regularly monitored and modified to correct any problems, are adapted to changing 

worksite environments, and effectively promote workplace safety and health.

 

4 OWCP data are available only on an FY basis. 
15

For the last several years, OSHA has asked agencies to evaluate their programs drawing from elements 

of OSHA’s Form 33. OSHA developed and validated Form 33 in 1985 to measure the effectiveness of 

private-sector employers’ safety and health management systems. Based on the concept of an 

organizational safety and health program, Form 33 uses 58 attributes to assess the three main 

components of a structured OSH program—operations, management, and culture. 

The operational component measures whether a program has a well-defined and communicated system 

to identify, correct, and control hazards. The managerial component assesses whether the program 

incorporates effective planning, administration, training, leadership, and supervision to support the 

prevention or elimination of workplace hazards. Finally, the cultural component evaluates whether the 

OSH program has developed an effective culture in which management and labor work collaboratively

to effectively reduce or eliminate hazards. While the attributes within each of the components are 

distinct, they are interdependent.

For the CY 2018 report, OSHA selected the following seven of the tool’s 58 attributes to assess

agencies’ OSH programs. 

Table 4 – Evaluation Components and Attributes

Operational Component – 2 Attributes

Hazard Anticipation and Detection 

1. Effective safety and health self-inspections are performed regularly. The purpose of this 

attribute is to determine if personnel in the agency are performing effective safety and health 

inspections on a regular basis.

Hazard Prevention and Control

2. Effective safety and health rules and work practices are in place. The purpose of this 

attribute is to determine if the agency has established general workplace rules and specific work 

practices that prescribe safe and healthful behavior and task performance methods.

Managerial Component – 3 Attributes

Planning and Evaluation 

3. Hazard incidence data are effectively analyzed. The purpose of this attribute is to determine 

if the agency uses hazard incidence data to set safety and health priorities.

4. A review of the overall safety and health management system is conducted at least 

annually. The purpose of this attribute is to determine if the agency periodically audits the 

management aspects of its Safety and Health Management System (SHMS), identifying 

progress and needed changes/improvements.

Administration and Supervision 

5. Individuals with assigned safety and health responsibilities have the necessary knowledge, 

skills, and timely information to perform their duties. The purpose of this attribute is to 

determine if the agency’s personnel have the understanding, skill, and current information 

needed to effectively perform their OSH responsibilities.
16

Cultural Component – 2 Attributes

Management Leadership

6. Managers allocate the resources needed to properly support the agency’s safety and 

health program. The purpose of this attribute is to determine if the agency’s managers 

demonstrate OSH leadership, promote a culture of safety and health in the organization, and 

support effective operation of the safety and health program by allocating needed resources.

Employee Participation

7. There is an effective process to involve employees in safety and health issues. The purpose 

of this attribute is to determine if there is an established organizational process that is known, 

trusted, and used by employees to provide input regarding safety and health issues.

Agencies were asked to rate each of the seven attributes based on their CY 2018 reporting period 

experience and select one of the following responses: does not exist, needs major improvements, needs 

minor improvements, or is highly effective. The response “does not exist” indicates that the attribute 

was not in place at all, while the response “is highly effective” indicates the attribute was completely

effective and integrated into the OSH program without need for improvement. The other ratings 

indicate some aspect of the attribute is present, needing either major or minor improvements, 

respectively. If an agency believes an attribute does not apply to its program, it may select “not 

applicable.” In addition to scoring each attribute, agencies had to provide detailed information 

supporting each chosen attribute rating.

Overall Assessment

For the CY 2018 reporting period, OSHA received responses from 88 of 97 agencies, a 91 percent 

response rate.

5

 Of the responding agencies, 24 (27 percent) provided an average rating of “highly 

effective” for each of the seven attributes, and 48 agencies (55 percent) indicated a need for minor 

improvements in most of their OSH programs. Agencies’ assessment scores indicate that, overall, 

these organizations recognize that effective safety and health programs are assets to their 

organizations. 

Of the 88 agencies that submitted reports, three agencies (3 percent) either did not provide attribute 

ratings or provided a “not applicable” rating for each attribute. In their reports, most of the 88 agencies 

indicated that, while they were committed to taking safety precautions in the course of their daily 

business operations, they did not employ full-time safety and health or collateral duty staff during CY

2018. These agencies also stated that the attributes did not apply to their operations because they had

very few employees and their operations were limited to administrative functions. The Nuclear Waste 

Technical Review Board stated, for example, that given the size and nature of its mission, it had not 

implemented formal safety programs.

 

5 Tables 5a and 5b depict the overall scores federal agencies assigned to the self-evaluations of their respective OSH 

programs for CY 2018. Those agencies that either did not rate any of the seven attributes in the self-assessment or did not 

conduct a self-evaluation are identified as “NR” (not reported) in the Table. An “IR” listing indicates that the agency rated 

some, but not all, of the attributes.
17

Table 5a. Major Departments/Independent Agencies’ Average Safety and Health Program Rating.

Agency Rating Agency Rating

Department of Agriculture  Department of Veterans Affairs 

Department of Commerce  Department of the Air Force 

Department of Defense  Department of the Army 

Department of Education NR Department of the Interior 

Department of Energy IR Department of the Navy 

Department of Health and Human 

Services

 Department of the Treasury 

Department of Homeland Security  Environmental Protection Agency 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development

 General Services Administration 

Department of Justice 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration 

Department of Labor  Social Security Administration 

Department of State NR Tennessee Valley Authority 

Department of Transportation 

Score Explanation

 Highly Effective – Completely in place 

 Needs Minor Improvements – Mostly in place with only minor improvements needed

 Needs Major Improvements – Some portion/aspect is present but major improvement is needed

 Does Not Exist – No discernible indication that a portion or aspect is even in place 

IR – Not all attributes were rated, incomplete response 

NR – Data not reported by agency
18

Table 5b. Smaller Independent Agencies’ Average Safety and Health Program Rating.

Agency Rating Agency Rating

AbilityOne Commission NR International Trade Commission 

Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation NR James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation 

African Development 

Foundation NR John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts NR

Agency for Global Media  Marine Mammal Commission 

Agency for International 

Development  Merit Systems Protection Board 

American Battle Monuments 

Commission  Millennium Challenge Corporation NR

Architectural and 

Transportation Barriers 

Compliance Board (Access 

Board)

IR Morris K. Udall & Stewart L. Udall 

Foundation 

Armed Forces Retirement 

Home IR National Archives and Records Administration



Central Intelligence Agency IR National Capital Planning Commission 

Chemical Safety and Hazard 

Investigation Board  National Council on Disability 

Commission of Fine Arts  National Credit Union Administration NR

Commission on Civil Rights IR National Endowment for the Arts 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission 

National Endowment for the 

Humanities IR

Consumer Product Safety 

Commission

 National Gallery of Art 

Corporation for National 

Community Service NR National Labor Relations Board 

Court Services and Offender 

Supervision Agency  National Mediation Board 

Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board

 National Science Foundation 

Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission

 National Transportation Safety Board 

Export-Import Bank of the 

United States IR Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Farm Credit Administration 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review 

Board NR

Federal Communications 

Commission 

Occupational Safety and Health Review 

Commission 

Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation  Office of Government Ethics 
19

Agency Rating Agency Rating

Federal Election Commission 

Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian 

Relocation IR

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission  Office of Personnel Management 

Federal Housing Finance 

Agency

 Office of Special Counsel IR

Federal Labor Relations 

Authority IR Overseas Private Investment Corporation IR

Federal Maritime 

Commission  Peace Corps 

Federal Mediation and 

Conciliation Services

 Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Review Commission  Postal Regulatory Commission 

Federal Reserve Board  Presidio Trust NR

Federal Retirement Thrift 

Investment Board IR Railroad Retirement Board IR

Federal Trade Commission  Securities and Exchange Commission 

Harry S. Truman Foundation  Selective Service System NR

Holocaust Memorial Museum  Small Business Administration 

Institute of Museum and 

Library Services

 Smithsonian Institution 

Inter-American Foundation  Social Security Advisory Board 

International Boundary and 

Water Commission

 Trade and Development Agency 

Score Explanation

 Highly Effective – Completely in place 

 Needs Minor Improvements – Mostly in place with only minor improvements needed

 Needs Major Improvements – Some portion/aspect is present but major improvement is needed

 Does Not Exist – No discernible indication that a portion or aspect is even in place 

IR – Not all attributes were rated, incomplete response 

NR – Data not reported by agency

Operational Component Assessment

Overall, agencies reported having these operational component attributes in place, indicated by a 

“needs minor improvements” or a “highly effective” rating. Specifically, 75 agencies (85 percent) 

provided a rating of “needs minor improvements” or “highly effective” for the self-inspection attribute. 

Most agencies stated that employees could report hazards to managers and safety personnel verbally 
20

and by email. Several agencies, including the Department of the Army, set up hazard reporting boxes 

in breakrooms and other conspicuous locations to allow anonymous hazard reporting. In addition to 

these methods, many agencies implemented electronic safety hazard reporting systems, allowing 

employees to report and track safety hazards from a single electronic portal. Many agencies reported 

conducting more self-inspections during CY 2018. The Department of Commerce, for example, stated 

that supervisors, employees, and safety and health staff conducted both scheduled and random selfinspections throughout the year at all facilities to determine if patterns of recurring hazards or 

noncompliance existed. Some agencies, such as the National Transportation Safety Board, reported 

using these self-inspections to identify and immediately correct any problems at their facilities.

Similarly, 79 agencies (90 percent) rated their agencies as “needs minor improvements” or “highly 

effective” for the work rules and practices attribute, reporting that the policies and procedures they had

implemented supported robust OSH programs. Several agencies reported the implementation of 

specific rules for good housekeeping and motor vehicle safety. Similar to many other agencies, the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) described its driving manual that addressed seatbelt use and 

texting, acknowledging that special consideration was available to those law enforcement or 

emergency functions that would require use of texting or handheld electronic devices while driving. 

Other agencies, such as the Farm Credit Administration, reported using electronic communications, 

including email and agency websites, to engage with employees and to highlight relevant safety and 

health topics.

A few agencies indicated a need for major improvements in the operational component of their OSH 

programs. For example, seven agencies (8 percent) provided ratings of “needs major improvements” 

and “does not exist” for the self-inspection attribute. In general, these agencies then outlined steps they 

were taking to improve their self-inspections. The American Battle Monument Commission reported

that it had hired a contract safety officer to begin conducting inspections. The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission reported that it started a baseline hazard analysis inspection in CY 2018, 

which revealed employees had been sharing personal protective equipment (PPE) on regulatory 

inspections. This finding led the agency to implement a comprehensive PPE program. In addition, 

agencies with low ratings for this component reported on how they were developing or improving their 

safety rules and work practices. The General Services Administration (GSA) reported updating its 

travel and motor vehicle policy and procedures in CY 2018, and the National Science Foundation 

reported that it updated procedures for bicyclists entering its parking facility to reduce the likelihood of 

accidents.

In CY 2018, some agencies provided ratings of “not applicable” or “not reported” for self-inspections

(6 agencies, 7 percent) and work rules and practices (8 agencies, 9 percent). OSHA continues to work 

with these agencies to determine how best to implement these programs, if needed. 

Managerial Component Assessment

Agencies reported that the attributes of the managerial component were generally effective, as

indicated by a “needs minor improvements” or a “highly effective” rating. 

Only 51 of the 88 responding agencies provided higher ratings for the incident data attribute in the 

managerial component. DoD reported that it was conducting a comprehensive incident data reform 

initiative to aid in ensuring incident data reporting and investigations were consistent and complete. 

As with other agencies, DOJ reported that findings from investigations were shared with appropriate 

employees through either broadcasts, emails, newsletters, or SharePoint. The Smithsonian Institution 

reported using trend analysis generated from incident reports to formulate strategies to improve safety 

and reduce injuries. Those agencies providing the lower rating to this attribute reported that they did 
21

not assess their incident data across their agencies or did not experience the injuries that make such 

analysis relevant. The Small Business Administration reported such assessments were made at the 

local level and were not tracked agency-wide. Other agencies, such as the Defense Nuclear Facilities

Safety Board, reported that as small agencies with no serious accidents, they had not implemented such 

a program.

Agencies providing the higher ratings on the annual SHMS review attribute (66 agencies, 75 percent) 

provided examples of the steps they took to assess and improve their program. The Department of the

Air Force (USAF) reported having metrics to track both leading and lagging indicators, noting that 

bases are asked what challenges they are facing so that issues can be elevated to the appropriate 

military command level and appropriate action can be taken. The Department of Commerce reported it

conducted safety and health programmatic management audits and loss source analysis on two of the 

bureaus in 2018 and then conducted a gap analysis for the Office of the Secretary. It noted the audits 

were intended to identify both the strengths and weaknesses within the bureaus’ and offices’ safety 

programs. Those agencies reporting lower ratings on this attribute explained the steps they were taking 

to either implement an SHMS or improve the one they had in place. The Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission reported it had taken steps to begin implementing a program. The Agency for 

International Development reported it was currently working to develop a comprehensive program.

During the CY 2018 reporting period, the knowledge, skills, and information attribute used to assess 

the Administration/Supervision subcomponent received the highest number of “needs minor 

improvements” and “highly effective” ratings (75 agencies, 85 percent) of the attributes within the

managerial component. Many agencies, including DoD, indicated that they provided managers and 

supervisors with sufficient resources to effectively implement OSH programs during the planning, 

programming, budgeting, and execution phases. DoD stated OSH staffing levels were adequate to 

assist in implementing policy requirements, and all OSH staff members had the resources necessary to 

perform their tasks, including the authority to act. The DHS Transportation Safety Administration 

reported that its safety action teams provide a forum for employee and management representatives to 

meet and discuss mutual OSH issues and concerns, use their knowledge and experience of workplace 

operations and activities to assist top management officials in implementing the local OSH program, 

and improve safety practices and procedures. Agencies reporting lower ratings were generally those 

agencies with low numbers and rates of injuries and did not employ safety personnel. OSHA 

continues to work to ensure agencies know the resources OSHA can provide. 

While ratings overall suggested agencies had relatively strong managerial components for the safety 

program, some agencies either assessed the attributes as “not applicable” or did not report.

Specifically, “not applicable” or “not reported” ratings were provided for the incidence data (23 

agencies, 26 percent), and annual SHMS review (10 agencies, 11 percent) attributes. Additionally, five 

agencies (6 percent) provided “not applicable” or “not reported” ratings for the knowledge, skills, and 

information attribute. OSHA will work with these agencies to determine how best to make changes to 

incorporate some level of managerial aspects to ensure the safety of their workforce.

Cultural Component Assessment

Agencies assessed whether managers were allocated the resources they needed to support their OSH 

program and whether agencies had an effective process for involving employees in safety issues. 

Similar to the other two components, most federal agencies provided a “needs minor improvements” or 

“highly effective” rating for both cultural component attributes. Seventy-three agencies (83 percent) 

provided a “needs minor improvements” or “highly effective” rating for the resource allocation

attribute, while nine agencies (10 percent) reported “not applicable” or “not rated” for the same 
22

attribute. Several agencies, such as the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, reported 

having a specified budget for OSH issues and supporting OSH personnel attendance at training and 

OSH meetings. Those having lower ratings, such as the Small Business Administration, did not report 

having such support in place.

For the employee involvement attribute, 73 agencies (83 percent) provided a “needs minor 

improvements” or “highly effective” rating for the process involvement attribute. Some agencies, such 

as the Department of the Interior (DOI), described how employees are invited and encouraged to 

participate in facility inspections, operating procedures development, and health and wellness 

activities; to conduct after-action reviews, performance reviews, and project planning; to volunteer as 

collateral duty safety officers; to attend safety and health training events; and to provide 

input/suggestions for improving safety and health in their work environment. Agencies with lower 

ratings for employee involvement generally described basic elements in place, such as OSH surveys,

but did not describe as many or robust programs to engage employees.

Similar to the other components, some agencies did not assess cultural attributes. For both the cultural 

attributes, nine agencies (10 percent) rated themselves either as “not applicable” or as “not reported.” 

OSHA continues to work with agencies to ensure they fully understand the importance of managerial 

leadership and employee involvement.

Table 6 provides a summary of the agency responses for the seven attributes.

Table 6. Number of Federal Agencies Self-assigned Ratings to Safety and Health Program Attributes 

Operational Component Number of Agencies with the 

Self-assigned Rating

Subcomponent Attribute     NA NR

Hazard 

Anticipation/Detection Self-inspection 56 19 6 1 1 5

Hazard 

Prevention/Control Work Rules and 

Practices 56 23 1 0 1 7

Managerial Component Number of Agencies with the 

Self-assigned Rating

Subcomponent Attribute     NA NR

Planning/Evaluation Incidence Data 32 19 5 9 17 6

Planning/Evaluation Annual SHMS Review 36 30 6 6 6 4

Administration/

Supervision

Knowledge, Skills, 

and Information 46 29 6 2 2 3

Cultural Component Number of Agencies with the 

Self-assigned Rating

Subcomponent Attribute     NA NR

Management Leadership Resource Allocation 42 31 5 1 3 6
23

Employee Participation Process Involvement 52 21 4 2 2 7

Score Explanation

 Highly Effective – Completely in place 

 Needs Minor Improvements – Mostly in place with only minor improvements needed

 Needs Major Improvements – Some portion/aspect is present but major improvement is needed

 Does Not Exist – No discernible indication that a portion or aspect is even in place 

NA – Not applicable

NR – Data not reported by agency

Recordkeeping

As set forth in 29 CFR §1904, federal agencies must maintain injury and illness records in the same 

format as the private sector. The recordkeeping requirement allows agencies and OSHA to identify 

worksites with the highest injury and illness rates and to identify the training needs of federal agencies. 

DOL, through its Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), annually collects the statutorily required injury and 

illness records from all Executive Branch agencies and provides the records to OSHA.

The OSHA data collection cycle began in CY 2014, and the fifth completed data collection cycle 

occurred in CY 2018. OSHA worked with BLS to track the data collected and monitored its quality. 

OSHA also worked with OWCP to assist agencies using ECOMP (The Employees’ Compensation 

Operations & Management Portal)6to ensure that all required data were captured and explain the 

procedures for transferring the data from ECOMP to BLS. OSHA provided agencies with guidance 

about the data collection process and followed up with information on errors identified in the 

submissions.

During the reporting period, OSHA received complete establishment data from 59 of 95 agencies (62

percent) and partial data from an additional 24 agencies (25 percent). The most common errors were 

failures to provide the number of employees or hours worked for each establishment. OSHA will 

analyze the collected data for key findings and the collection process for lessons learned to further 

streamline and simplify the procedure. Appendix 1 lists federal agencies’ injury and illness 

submissions.

Compliance Assistance

Agency Technical Assistance Request

An ATAR is a consultative service available to federal agencies and is similar to OSHA’s Consultation 

Program for private-sector employers. Federal agencies may contact an OSHA Area Office and 

request technical assistance, including hazard abatement advice, training, a partial or comprehensive 

visit, and/or program assistance. While the request is considered consultative, an agency’s subsequent 

failure or refusal to abate serious hazards may result in an inspection referral. 

In CY 2018, six OSHA Area Offices conducted a total of 10 ATARs:

 

 

6 EComp is an electronic claims filing system for OWCP information that also allows federal agencies to maintain their 

OSHA-required injury and illness data.
24

 The Bridgeport, Connecticut Area Office provided confined space training to VA in West 

Haven, Connecticut. 

 The Bridgeport, Connecticut Area Office provided VA in Newington, Connecticut, with 

training on walking and working surfaces and machine guarding.

 The Baltimore, Maryland Area Office assisted the Consumer Product Safety Commission with 

an indoor air quality assessment. OSHA conducted air sampling, and no overexposures were 

found. 

 The Cleveland, Ohio Area Office conducted four ATARs for DOL’s OWCP in Cleveland, 

Ohio. Each of the four ATARs involved an assessment of ergonomic factors in an office work 

environment. 

 The Kansas City, Missouri Area Office provided technical assistance to DOL’s OWCP in 

Kansas City, Missouri regarding noise monitoring. Specifically, OWCP asked OSHA to assess 

the work environment and determine if the new mail sorting equipment exposed employees to a 

potential noise hazard. OSHA determined that the mail sorting equipment operated at decibels 

below the 85 decibel Action Limit.

 The Boise, Idaho Area Office conducted an ATAR for USDA in Kimberly, Idaho. USDA 

requested industrial hygiene help regarding air monitoring for welding in its maintenance shop. 

USDA also requested help with potential silica dust exposures in the soil/plant processing area. 

OSHA did not identify any overexposures from welding. OSHA detected significant silica dust 

level exposures for short periods during the day. In response, USDA implemented a respiratory 

protection program and medical surveillance for workers in the plant/soil grinding room. It

also plans to assess local exhaust ventilation in the soil/plant processing area.

 The Washington Area Office conducted an ATAR for the Bonneville Power Administration 

(BPA) in Vancouver, Washington. BPA was reviewing a switching and clearance procedure at 

one of its sites and asked for OSHA assistance in determining whether its proposed revision to 

the standard would meet all pertinent OSHA standards. OSHA determined that both BPA’s 

current procedures and proposed revision to the procedures met OSHA standards. 

Field Federal Safety and Health Councils

FFSHCs are federal interagency groups, chartered by the Secretary, that bring together local OSH 

professionals for education, problem solving, and cooperation in the safety and health field. Located 

throughout the nation, FFSHCs work to reduce the incidence, severity, and cost of accidents, injuries, 

and illnesses within their designated geographic areas.

Under 29 CFR §1960.89, each active FFSHC must submit an annual report to the Secretary describing 

activities and programs for the previous calendar year and plans, objectives, and goals for the current 

year. OSHA uses these reports to assess each individual FFSHC’s program plans to determine the 

success of these goals and objectives. The FFSHCs that best exemplify the intent and purpose of the 

FFSHC program may receive an achievement award from the Secretary.

Agencies reported varied involvement, from extensive engagement to occasional worker attendance at 

FFSHC meetings. DoD, for example, reported that approximately 20 percent of its agencies 

participated in local FFSHCs during CY 2018. Many DoD agencies hosted local and regional 
25

meetings and provided logistical support. Similarly, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

reported that 18 of its employees participated in 10 FFSHCs. Collectively, EPA employees attended 

more than 30 FFSHC meetings in CY 2018. In-kind support of local councils was reported by 28

agencies during CY 2018. That support ranged from generating meeting notices and providing 

meeting space to assisting the FFSHC with program development.

In CY 2018, 31 FFSHCs actively carried out efforts to improve the effectiveness of OSH functions 

within the government.

7

 According to the annual reports submitted to OSHA, 30 departments and 

agencies participated in the FFSHCs and over 2,000 federal employees attended meetings and/or 

council-provided training. Participation decreased for some because of limited funds and personnel 

shortages. Nationwide coverage by FFSHCs, particularly in rural areas, also limited participation.

In determining award recipients, OSHA forms three categories, based on the size of the federal 

populations served, which allows FFSHCs to compete with those that possess approximately the same 

resources and serve similar populations. Each annual report to the Secretary is evaluated, rated, and 

ranked against other FFSHCs in its category. The top three scoring FFSHCs in each category receive 

awards for Superior Performance, Meritorious Achievement, and Notable Recognition.

In CY 2018, eleven FFSHCs received a Secretary’s Award for their activities. By category, these 

were:

Category I: Federal employee population exceeding 24,000

 Superior Performance – Middle Tennessee

 Meritorious Achievement – Greater New York

 Meritorious Achievement – Oklahoma

 Notable Recognition – Denver

Category II: Federal employee population between 12,000 and 24,000

 Superior Performance – Greater Kansas City

 Meritorious Achievement – Minneapolis

 Notable Recognition – Greater St. Louis

 Notable Recognition – Louisville Area

Category III: Federal employee population of fewer than 12,000

 Superior Performance – Western New York

 Meritorious Achievement – Hudson Valley

 Notable Recognition – Duluth/Superior

Alternate and Supplementary Standards

Under 29 CFR §1960.17, if an agency cannot comply with an applicable OSHA standard, the agency 

may submit a request to OSHA for an alternate standard.8 There are six OSHA-approved alternate 

standards:

 Federal Aviation Administration - Alternate Standard for Fire Safety in Air Traffic Control 

Towers;

 National Archives and Records Administration - Standard on Special-Purpose Ladders;

 

7 Please see Appendix 2 for a complete listing of active FFSHCs for CY 2018 and other FFSHC information.

8 An alternate standard is the federal sector’s equivalent of a private-sector variance. Any alternate standard must provide 

protection for the affected federal employees that is equal to or greater than the applicable OSHA standard.
26

 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) - Standard for Lifting Devices and 

Equipment;

 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Alternate Diving Standards;

 Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command - Management of WeightHandling Equipment; and

 Department of the Navy - Gas Free Engineering Manual.

Under 29 CFR §1960.18, if no OSHA standard exists that is appropriate for application to working 

conditions of federal agency employees, an agency must develop a supplementary standard. There are 

two supplementary standards:

 NASA - Safety Standard for Explosives, Propellants, and Pyrotechnics; and

 DOI/National Park Service - Supplementary Standard for Containers and Portable Tanks 

Transport.

FEDWEEK

OSHA provides a week of training each year, known as FEDWEEK, specifically for federal agency 

OSH personnel. The tuition-free training is held at OTI in Arlington Heights, Illinois. OSHA seeks 

input from federal agencies when developing the FEDWEEK curriculum. The number of federal 

agencies represented at the CY 2018 event increased from prior years (Table 7). In CY 2018, OSHA 

provided nine half-day seminars, offered twice during the week. Federal OSH employee participants 

had the opportunity to attend up to six different sessions on various topics, including hearing 

conservation, walking/working surfaces, control of hazardous energy, construction safety, confined 

spaces, bloodborne pathogens, asbestos management and housekeeping, OSHA inspection process for 

federal agencies, and accident investigation. 

Table 7: FEDWEEK Participation by Attendees and Calendar Year (2016–18).

 Calendar Year

2018 2017 2016 

Participants 98 76 73

Agencies Represented 19 18 NA*

 *A new system for registering students did not include this information.

Federal Agency OSH Managers’ Roundtable

The Federal Agency OSH Managers’ Roundtable is a valuable tool for agencies to exchange

information on safety and health issues and to share best practices. In 2018, OSHA held three Safety 

and Health Managers Roundtable meetings in February, April, and October. A range of topics was

covered during the first two meetings. OSHA provided updates on its inspections of federal agency 

establishments and discussed two campaigns– the National Safety Stand-Down for Fall Prevention and 

Safe + Sound. Agencies also presented on topics such as use of OSHA’s Voluntary Protection 

Program and efforts made to develop comprehensive safety and health benchmarking. In addition, 

BLS and OWCP reported on agency procedures for reporting their injury and illness data. The final, 

October meeting was dedicated to a workshop by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health (NIOSH) on Prevention through Design (PtD). The workshop provided individuals with a 

thorough understanding of both the priority and the process of PtD and included practical examples.
27

SECTION 2 – FEDERAL AGENCY OSH 

ACTIVITIES

This section contains agency-specific OSH program information. The annual agency report includes

fatality, hospitalization, and amputation data; injury and illness trend analysis and methods to mitigate 

hazards; OSH training programs; OSH committee and council participation; and whistleblower 

protection provisions. 

In accordance with 29 CFR §1960.34 and §1960.35, GSA and NIOSH must provide certain services to 

federal agencies to support improved safety and health conditions for federal employees. A summary

of their activities is provided at the end of this section. 

Fatalities, Hospitalizations, and Amputations

The Act, provisions of 29 CFR §1960, and other regulations require employers to investigate, track, 

and promptly report to OSHA findings that involve work-related fatalities, hospitalizations, and 

amputations. The data presented in this section are broken down by major department and agencies 

and smaller independent agencies. Summaries and analysis follow accordingly. 

Major Departments and Agencies 

Overall, the major departments and agencies reported 221 fatalities, hospitalizations, and amputations.

Since not all agencies submitted reports for both years, year-over-year comparisons are limited to the 

individual department or agency. Nine of these departments/agencies showed a decrease in reported 

incidents, while four showed an increase.

Department and/or agency summaries follow Table 8a only for those departments and agencies that

realized a significant year-over-year change within the context of the overall reported number. The 

Department of the Treasury, for example, reported a single amputation in CY 2018, resulting in a 100

percent increase in amputations and overall total reports because they did not report any fatalities, 

hospitalizations, or amputations in CY 2017. Given this context, no further assessment has been made. 

Appendix 4 includes incident descriptions for all the fatalities, hospitalizations, and amputations 

reported and are categorized by cause (e.g., fall, vehicle, struck-by). 

Table 8a: Major Department and/or Agency fatalities/hospitalizations/amputations for CY 2017 and 

CY 2018. 

Fatalities Hospitalizations Amputations Total Reports

CY17 CY18 CY17 CY18 CY17 CY18 ∆

Dept. of Agriculture 3 0 22 9 4 1 ↓ 66 percent

Dept. of the Air Force 0 0 19 21 4 2 ↔

Dept. of the Army 2 3 25 8 2 4 ↓ 48 percent

Dept. of Commerce 0 0 1 5 0 0 *

Dept. of Defense 

(excluding AF, Army, & 

Navy)

0 1 5 8 3 1 ↑ 25 percent

Dept. of Energy 0 1 1 6 0 0 ↑ 600 percent

Dept. of Health & Human 

Services 0 1 6 2 1 0 ↓ 57 percent
28

Fatalities Hospitalizations Amputations Total Reports

CY17 CY18 CY17 CY18 CY17 CY18 ∆

Dept. of Homeland 

Security 1 2 30 44 0 0 ↑ 48 percent

Dept. of Housing & Urban 

Development 0 0 0 0 0 0 ↔

Dept. of the Interior 2 3 9 32 2 0 ↑ 169 percent

Dept. of Justice 1 4 14 13 5 7 ↑ 20 percent

Dept. of Labor 1 0 8 1 1 4 ↓ 50 percent

Dept. of the Navy 0 1 14 12 3 2 ↓ 12 percent

Dept. of State 10 NR 30 NR 1 NR **

Dept. of Transportation 1 0 0 0 1 0 *

Dept. of the Treasury 0 0 0 0 0 1 *

Dept. of Veterans Affairs 0 2 0 15 0 2 *

Environmental Protection 

Agency 1 0 4 0 0 0 *

General Services 

Administration NR 1 NR 0 NR 0 **

National Aeronautics & 

Space Administration 0 0 0 0 0 0 ↔

Social Security 

Administration 0 0 2 0 0 1 ↓ 50 percent

Tennessee Valley 

Authority 0 0 1 1 1 0 ↓ 50 percent

Total 22 19 190 177 28 25 ↓ 8 percent

The ↑ indicates a respective increase, ↓ indicates a respective decrease, and ↔ indicates no changes 

in the Total Reports in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. “NR” indicates no response. The * 

indicates that zero incidents were reported for one of the calendar years, so change cannot be 

calculated. The ** indicates that data were not reported for one of the calendar years, so change 

cannot be calculated. 

Major Department and/or Agency Summaries

USDA reported 66 percent fewer incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. Fewer hospitalizations

accounted for the greatest reduction in the overall report count. An incident cause analysis suggests 

that USDA successfully minimized hazards in a variety of conditions. CY 2017 hospitalizations were 

attributed to ten separate conditions, whereas in CY 2018, hospitalizations were attributed to only four 

separate conditions. Hospitalizations associated with falls and heat-related illnesses were the greatest 

contributors in each year. 

 Trends: Falls 

o Accounted for 18 percent, or four of the 22 hospitalizations in CY 2017 

o Accounted for 56 percent, or five of the nine hospitalization incidents CY 2018 

 Trends: Heat9 

o Accounted for 23 percent, or five of the 22 hospitalizations in CY 2017 

 

9 Heat includes reported diagnoses of rhabdomyolysis, which is a serious syndrome due to direct or indirect muscle injury 

and can include hyperthermia or heat stroke.
29

o Accounted for 22 percent, or two of the nine hospitalizations in CY 2018 

The Department of the Army reported 48 percent fewer incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. 

Fewer hospitalizations accounted for the greatest reduction in the overall report count. An incident 

cause analysis suggests that the Army successfully minimized hazards in a variety of conditions. CY 

2017 hospitalizations were attributed to 12 separate conditions, whereas in CY 2018, hospitalizations 

were attributed to only four separate conditions. Hospitalizations associated with falls were the 

greatest contributor in each year. 

 Trend: Falls

o Accounted for 36 percent, or nine of the 25 hospitalizations in CY 2017

o Accounted for 25 percent, or two of the eight hospitalizations in CY 2018

DoD reported a 25 percent increase in incidents, which was an increase from two to eight incidents. In 

CY 2018 there was one more fatality, three more hospitalizations, and two fewer amputations.

The Department of Energy reported seven incidents in CY 2018 compared to one in CY 2017. Since 

there were relatively few incidents overall, the increase in incidents was 600 percent. 

 Trend: Vehicle 

o Accounted for 71 percent, or five of the seven incidents resulting in a fatality or

hospitalization in CY 2018

DHS reported a 48 percent increase in incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. An agency-level 

analysis indicates that Customs and Border Protection contributed toward the increase in the overall 

report count. 

 Trend: Heat 

o Accounted for 33 percent, or eight of the 24 hospitalizations in CY 2017

o Accounted for 18 percent, or six of the 33 hospitalizations in CY 2018

 Trend: Vehicle

o Accounted for 17 percent, or four of the 24 hospitalizations in CY 2017

o Accounted for 34 percent, or 12 of the 35 incidents resulting in fatality or

hospitalization in CY 2018

DOI reported a 169 percent increase in incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. Hospitalizations 

increased by 256 percent from CY 2017 to CY 2018. An incident cause analysis suggests that a

variety of hazardous conditions increased from four distinct causes—heat, motor vehicle, struck-by, 

and unclassified events—to ten distinct causes in CY 2018. The National Park Service submitted zero 

hospitalizations in CY 2017 and 18 hospitalizations in CY 2018. The National Park Service accounted 

for 56 percent, or 18 of 32, of DOI’s hospitalizations. 

 Trend: Heat 

o Accounted for 44 percent, or four of nine hospitalizations in CY 2017

o Accounted for 13 percent, or four of 32 hospitalizations in CY 2018

 Trend: Falls

o Accounted for 31 percent, or 10 of 32 hospitalizations in CY 2018 

DOJ reported a 20 percent increase in incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. Amputation and 

fatality incidents led to the increase in reports. An incident cause analysis indicates that a variety of 

hazardous conditions led to the increase in fatalities and amputations, but the leading incident causes in 

CY 2017 continued in CY 2018. 

 Trend: Falls
30

o Accounted for 25 percent, or five of the 20 reported incidents in CY 2017

o Accounted for 25 percent, or six of the 24 reported incidents in CY 2018 

 Trend: Machinery 

o Accounted for 35 percent, or seven of the 20 incidents in CY 2017

o Accounted for 17 percent, or 4 of the 24 incidents in CY 2018, including amputation 

and fatality reports

DOL reported a 50 percent decrease in incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 2017. An incident 

analysis indicates that DOL reduced the hazardous conditions from CY 2017 to CY 2018. In CY 

2017, for instance, five distinct causes led to hospitalizations: cuts, falls, vehicles, poison, and struckby. In CY 2018, three distinct causes led to hospitalization or amputations: crushing, machinery, and

vehicle. 

The Department of the Navy reported a 12 percent decrease in incidents in CY 2018 compared to CY 

2017. An incident analysis indicates, despite the minor reduction in incidents, that falls and vehiclerelated hospitalizations consistently accounted for the greatest percentage of incidents in each CY. 

 Trend: Falls

o Accounted for 36 percent, or five of the 14 hospitalizations in CY 2017

o Accounted for 50 percent, or six of the 12 hospitalizations in CY 2018

VA reported zero fatalities, hospitalizations, or amputations in CY 2017. However, VA reported 19 

incidents in CY 2018. An incident analysis indicates that falls contributed to 47 percent, or seven of 

the 15 hospitalizations with the remaining hospitalizations occurring because of assault, general illness, 

vehicle, or strains. 

An overall incident cause analysis for the departments and major agencies indicates that incidents 

related to falls and vehicles were on the increase over the reporting years. Departments reported a 25

percent increase in falls including one that resulted in a fatality in CY 2018. Incidents related to 

vehicles by land (i.e., automobiles) increased by 83 percent in CY 2018. Hospitalizations and fatalities 

related to firearms accounted for a 40 percent increase in CY 2018. Heat-related incidents accounted 

for a 29 percent decrease in incidents in CY 2018. 

Table 8b: Major department and/or agency fatalities/hospitalizations/amputations incident cause 

analysis for CY 2017 and CY 2018. 

Fatalities Hospitalizations Amputations Total Reports

CY 17 CY 18 CY 17 CY 18 CY 17 CY 18 ∆

(Air) Vehicle 0 0 0 1 0 0 *

Assault 1 0 1 3 0 0 ↑ 50 percent

Bite 0 0 5 6 0 0 ↑ 20 percent

Burn 0 0 6 2 0 0 ↓ 67 percent

Chemical 0 0 2 0 0 0 *

Crushed 1 0 4 5 7 12 ↑ 42 percent

Cut/Pierce 0 0 4 4 4 0 ↓ 50 percent

Electrical 0 1 4 1 0 0 ↓ 50 percent

Explosion 9 0 31 1 0 0 ↓ 98 percent

Fall 1 1 50 64 1 0 ↑ 25 percent

Fire 0 2 0 5 0 0 *
31

Fatalities Hospitalizations Amputations Total Reports

CY 17 CY 18 CY 17 CY 18 CY 17 CY 18 ∆

Firearm 0 3 5 4 0 0 ↑ 40 percent

Heat 2 0 22 17 0 0 ↓ 29 percent

Illness 0 1 5 9 0 0 ↑ 100 percent

(Land) Vehicle 6 6 12 26 0 1 ↑ 83 percent

Lightning 0 0 0 1 0 0 *

Machinery 0 1 5 4 15 12 ↓ 15 percent

Plant 0 0 1 0 0 0 *

Poison 0 0 1 0 0 0 *

Smoke 0 0 1 0 0 0 *

Strain 0 1 11 11 0 0 ↑ 9 percent

Stress 0 0 1 0 0 0 *

Struck-by 1 1 12 4 1 0 ↓ 64 percent

Unclassified 1 2 7 9 0 0 ↑ 38 percent

Total 22 19 190 177 28 25 ↓ 8 percent

Small Independent Agency Summary

Table 8c includes the four small independent agencies with reportable incidents. The reporting 

agencies and incidents were so few in number that a percent change column, similar to Table 8a, is not 

necessary to depict relative increase or decrease. 

 Trend: Falls

o Accounted for 50 percent, or three of the six hospitalizations in CY 2018 

Table 8c: Small independent agency fatalities/hospitalizations/amputations for CY 2017 and 2018. 

The table contains only those agencies with reportable data. 

Fatalities Hospitalizations Amputations

CY17 CY18 CY17 CY18 CY17 CY18

Consumer Product Safety Commission 0 0 1 0 0 0

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 0 0 0 1 0 0

Federal Trade Commission 0 0 0 1 0 0

Smithsonian Institution 1 0 3 4 1 0

National Credit Union Administration 0 0 1 0 0 0

Total 1 0 5 6 1 0

Certified Safety and Health Committees

A CSHC is an agency OSH committee that the head of the sponsoring agency has certified to the 

Secretary as meeting the requirements of 29 CFR §1960, Subpart F. These committees monitor and

support agencies’ OSH programs and allow agencies to maintain an open channel of communication 

between employees and management. CSHCs also allow agencies to facilitate employee input on

OSH-related policies, conditions, and practices.

When an agency decides to form a CSHC, it must report this intent to the Secretary. Specifically, the 

agency must provide the Secretary with information regarding the location and coverage area 

(establishments and populations) of the committee and the name and phone number of each committee 
32

chair. In addition, the agency must certify that the committee meets all the requirements of 29 CFR

§1960, Subpart F. The agency must also provide an update of OSH program activity as part of the

required annual report to the Secretary.

Agencies with CSHCs that meet all requirements are exempt from unannounced OSHA inspections. 

However, these agencies may request an inspection. While any agency may form a CSHC, only four 

certified committees existed in CY 2018. The Secretary recognized the following CSHC departments 

and independent agencies:

 CIA

 DOL

 TVA

 SEC

CIA, DOL, and TVA submitted information certifying to the Secretary that their respective CSHCs 

met the requirements of the subpart during the CY 2018 reporting period. The SEC did not report on

the status of its CSHC, but follow-up by OSHA confirmed it remained active. 

Other OSH Committees and Councils

Federal agencies were asked to provide information on their involvement in both internal and external 

OSH committees and councils, including their participation in FFSHCs. For internal activity, 46 

agencies (52 percent) reported that they encourage employee participation in OSH-related committees 

at the departmental, agency, and field operation levels, and in a variety of local OSH committees, 

including FFSHCs. Of the 46 agencies that were involved in OSH committees or councils, 34 agencies 

(74 percent) reported that they have an internal OSH committee. Internal OSH committee membership 

varied among agencies. Some agencies reported that membership included only management, while 

other agencies noted that committee participation was open to all level of employees, and was required 

for employees with OSH-related expertise, duties, or responsibilities. DoD instituted the Defense 

Safety Oversight Council as the senior departmental governance body for operational safety and OSH. 

Defense Safety Oversight Council membership comprises the senior-most decision-making personnel 

and senior OSH personnel from DoD components. The Defense Safety Oversight Council met every 

month to provide governance on DoD-wide efforts to reduce incidents, and occupational illnesses and 

injuries. USDA employs safety committees at geographic locations throughout the country to provide

opportunities for employee participation. At some of its smaller locations, every employee was a 

member of the safety committee. 

Agencies were also asked to indicate if they support and recognize OSH-related certifications from 

outside organizations. Twenty-six agencies (57 percent) reported employee participation in external 

OSH committees, including OSHA’s Office of Federal Agency Program’s Roundtable meetings. Most 

agencies, such as GSA and USDA, reported that they encourage employees to participate in OSH 

professional organizations, such as the American Industrial Hygiene Association and the National 

Safety Council. They encouraged OSH personnel to obtain and maintain professional certifications

such as Certified Safety Professional and Certified Industrial Hygienist, and licenses such as 

Professional Engineer, to demonstrate competence in assigned duties. Many agencies, including the 

National Gallery of Art, indicated that while they are not currently involved in any external OSH 

committees, they would seek future participation opportunities when time and workload permit. For 

CY 2018, 38 agencies (43 percent) reported encouraging employees to seek professional certification 

and participate in professional OSH organizations. For example, TVA encouraged its OSH 

professionals to maintain professional certifications and to pursue advanced certifications by paying 
33

for employees’ continuing education credits and associated travel expenses. 

Analyzing and Controlling Hazards

OSHA asked agencies how they identify OSH-related trends, such as types and causes of injuries. Of 

the 82 agencies that provided information on this topic, 47 (57 percent) reported that the most frequent 

cause of employee injuries was slips, trips, and falls. Other common causes of injuries included 

materials handling (sprains/strains, exertion) and ergonomics. The Department of the Navy, for 

example, reported that in CY 2018, slips, trips, and falls accounted for the highest percentage, by 

category, of work-related incidents resulting in bruising, contusions, sprains, and injuries to muscles, 

tendons and ligaments. Over-exertion injuries followed slips, trips, and falls and caused injuries such 

as abrasions, scratches, and fractures. 

Agencies summarized actions taken to prevent recurrence of these incidents, including the use of 

warning signs, formal employee training, safety campaigns, incident trend analysis, workplace 

inspections, proactive housekeeping procedures, and timely and thorough snow and ice clearing 

practices on walkways and working surfaces. EPA, for example, posted safety bulletins on slips, trips, 

and falls to its Intranet homepage and regularly sent reminders to raise awareness on the topic. In CY 

2018, the EPA posted a message on its homepage, reminding employees that slips, trips, and falls 

remained the leading cause of work-related injury across the agency and identified resources that 

explained how to prevent incidents. USAF also used publications and videos to address slips, trips,

and falls. In CY 2018, USAF produced and distributed 29 “Risk Management in 45 Seconds or Less” 

videos as incident prevention messages. These videos were used at more than 196 USAF facilities 

worldwide. In addition, more than 500,000 American Forces Network (AFN) viewers in 177 countries 

viewed the videos. AFN is the broadcast service operated by the United States Armed Forces’

American Forces Radio and Television Service.

Several agencies, including DHS, reported participation in OSHA’s National Safety Stand-Down for 

Fall Prevention held in May 2018. The stand-down brings awareness to fall hazards, typical work 

tasks associated with fall risks, and fall protection strategies. The Agency for Global Media 

highlighted its participation in National Safety Stand-Down for Fall Prevention by producing a video 

on the stand-down and airing it on all the monitors and televisions throughout the agency. GSA 

reported that roughly 125 of its employees participated in the 2018 stand-down. 

Agencies were also asked to provide information on their efforts to identify and analyze workplace 

hazards. Agencies described a wide range of analytical methods used to prevent future hazards, from 

manually cataloging incidents to using electronic applications to track hazards. USDA uses electronic 

applications to report and log hazards, allowing the agency to track hazard remediation. USDA held 

regular safety meetings with employees and management to discuss data captured in the electronic 

applications, including newly identified hazards and worksite inspection findings. DOJ provided its 

bureaus with hazard abatement forms along with annual safety and health inspection checklists. The 

bureaus maintained hazard abatement databases and reviewed those databases periodically to ensure 

that corrective actions have occurred.

Most agencies reported that they perform data analysis to determine the prevalence of injury type and 

cause and that they investigate jobs or tasks that result in injuries. These agencies employed root cause 

analysis to identify and mitigate or eliminate risk of injuries. Several agencies conducted root cause 

analysis to prevent recurrence of incidents. At DOL, each agency’s safety manager is responsible for 

implementing corrective actions based on the findings from a root cause analysis.
34

Another strategy for preventing and controlling occupational injuries, illnesses, and fatalities is to 

“design out” or minimize hazards and risks through a national initiative called Prevention through 

Design (PtD). Several agencies reported the implementation of PtD and highlighted its importance in 

all safety and health assessments, including business decisions.

Motor Vehicle Safety

In total, 70 federal agencies (80 percent) reported having an MVSP, with the majority noting 

compliance with E.O. 13043 and 13513, which require the use of seatbelts in motor vehicles and ban 

texting while driving, respectively. Most agencies reported that MVSPs limit the likelihood and effect 

of motor vehicle accidents. In addition, 32 agencies with an MVSP (46 percent) provided information 

on the roughly 11,321 motor vehicle accidents their employees experienced during CY 2018. These 

motor vehicle accidents resulted in approximately 1,804 employee injuries and five employee 

fatalities.

In CY 2018, as in the previous year, most agencies reported offering motor vehicle safety awareness 

training, developed by DOT, GSA, USDA, or similar organizations. Training topics covered by 

agencies included distracted driving prevention, safe holiday/seasonal driving, accident reporting 

procedures, driver improvement training for personnel involved in vehicle incidents, vehicle safety 

inspection procedures, and defensive driving training courses. In CY 2018, EPA added a training 

course to its MVSP that addresses driving hazards (e.g., downed trees and power lines) that employees 

may encounter after natural disasters. Most agencies also reported that they reiterated policies 

regarding seat belt and cell phone use while driving by placing reminders on their websites, in 

newsletters, and in emails to employees. 

Several agencies reported tracking seatbelt use after an accident, many using information from vehicle 

accident reports. A few agencies mentioned performing spot checks to ensure compliance, and others 

reported using electronic devices inside vehicles to monitor compliance. DHS vehicles also had a 

sticker prominently displayed informing occupants that policy required all occupants to use their 

seatbelt. In addition, DHS reviewed vehicle accident reports to determine seatbelt use and conducted

random spot checks of employees driving in and out of facilities. Noncompliant employees received

additional training or disciplinary action, such as having driving privileges revoked. 

DoD implemented comprehensive traffic safety program requirements designed to prevent motor 

vehicle-related incidents through the application of risk management strategies. Some of the strategies 

included vehicle design standards, operator duty time limitations, fatigue management evaluations,

pre-departure briefings and vehicle inspections, passenger and child restraint system requirements, and 

incident reporting. DoD also encouraged its local installations to institute additional initiatives 

applicable to local driving conditions to prevent the loss of personnel and equipment due to traffic 

incidents and reckless driving behavior. In addition, installations used commercial MVSPs, such as

the American Automobile Association’s Defensive Driving program and the National Safety Council’s 

Alive at 25 program. Some installations also used Stay Alive from Education’s Street Smart program. 

In the Street Smart program, first responders share real-life experiences that underscored what 

happened to individuals who made poor driving choices, such as driving without seatbelts, driving 

under the influence of alcohol/drugs, and texting while driving.

Twenty agencies have no MVSP for a variety of reasons, including having a small number of 

employees assigned to the agency, or the agency’s mission not requiring the agency to have a 

dedicated fleet of vehicles. A small number of agencies asserted that such a program was “not 

applicable” to their situations or failed to provide any report on the item. Some agencies deemed to 
35

have little to no training stated mere compliance with E.O. 13043 and 13513, with no indication of any 

further information on safety protocols or measures. OSHA will follow up with agencies to offer 

assistance in addressing motor vehicle safety.

Agencies having no MVSP include: Access Board, African Development Foundation, Commission on 

Civil Rights, Commission of Fine Arts, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Export-Import Bank, 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services, Federal 

Retirement Thrift Investment Board, Harry S. Truman Foundation, Inter-American Foundation, James 

Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation, National Council on Disability, Office of Special Council, 

Peace Corps, National Credit Union Administration, National Endowment for the Humanities, Pension 

Benefit Guaranty Corporation, Postal Regulatory Commission, and Social Security Advisory Board.

Table 9: Summary of Motor Vehicle Accidents as Reported by Departments and Independent 

Agencies (FY 2016 through CY 2018).

Department/Agency Status Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

CY 2018 CY 2017 CY 2016

Department of Agriculture 2,142 2,339 2,013

Department of the Air Force 21 19 18

Department of the Army ? 345 NR 15

Department of Commerce 2 80 106

Department of Defense 945 543 638

Department of Energy ? NR 85 95

Department of Health and Human 

Services

91 0 147

Department of Homeland Security 2,392 1,585 1,126

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development

? NR 0 NR

Department of Justice 2,197 2,251 2,303

Department of Labor 512 546 498

Department of the Interior 960 841 497

Department of the Navy 136 246 25

Department of State ? NR 2,024 1,885

Department of Transportation 47 39 181

Department of the Treasury 231 124 329

Department of Veterans Affairs 301 367 402

Environmental Protection Agency 39 29 43

General Services Administration 64 68 69

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration

177 69 85

Social Security Administration 39 18 32

Tennessee Valley Authority 193 227 NR

Office of Personnel Management 246 252 209

AbilityOne ? NR 0 NR

Access Board ? 0 NR 0

African Development Foundation 0 0 NR

Agency for Global Media 0 0 1
36

Department/Agency Status Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

CY 2018 CY 2017 CY 2016

Agency for Internal Development ? 0 NR NR

American Battle Monuments Commission 0 1 0

Armed Forces Retirement Home 0 0 0

Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation 

Board

1 0 0

Commission of Fine Arts ? 0 NR NR

Commission on Civil Rights 0 0 NR

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 0 0 NR

Consumer Product Safety Commission 0 2 7

Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency

7 7 NR

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 0 0 NR

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission

0 6 7

Export-Import Bank of the United States ? NR 0 0

Farm Credit Administration 0 2 0

Federal Communications Commission 3 7 5

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 3 6 35

Federal Election Commission 0 0 0

Federal Housing Finance Agency 0 1 0

Federal Labor Relations Authority ? NR NR 0

Federal Maritime Commission 0 0 0

Federal Mediation and Conciliation 

Service

? 0 NR 0

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review 

Commission

0 0 0

Federal Reserve Board 0 0 3

Federal Retirement Thrift Investment 

Board

0 0 0

Federal Trade Commission 0 0 0

Harry S. Truman Foundation ? 0 NR NR

Holocaust Memorial Museum 0 0 0

Institute of Museum and Library Services 0 0 NR

Inter-American Foundation ? 0 NR 0

International Trade Commission 0 0 NR

International Boundary and Water 

Commission

10 10 4

James Madison Memorial Fellowship 

Foundation

0 0 NR

John F. Kennedy Center ? NR 0 0
37

Department/Agency Status Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

CY 2018 CY 2017 CY 2016

Marine Mammal Commission 0 0 0

Merit Systems Protection Board 0 0 0

Millennium Challenge Corporation ? NR 0 0

Morris K. Udall & Stewart L. Udall 

Foundation

0 0 0

National Archives and Records 

Administration

1 4 1

National Capital Planning Commission 0 0 0

National Council on Disability ? 0 NR NR

National Credit Union Administration 0 3 NR

National Endowment for the Arts 0 0 NR

National Endowment for the Humanities ? 0 NR NR

National Gallery of Art 3 0 1

National Labor Relations Board 4 0 1

National Mediation Board 0 0 0

National Science Foundation 0 0 NR

National Transportation Safety Board 0 0 NR

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 0 1 10

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board 0 0 NR

Occupational Safety and Health Review 

Commission

0 0 0

Office of Government Ethics 0 0 NR

Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian 

Relocation

1 0 0

Office of Special Counsel ? 0 NR NR

Overseas Private Investment Corporation 0 0 1

Peace Corps ? 0 NR NR
38

Department/Agency Status Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

Number of 

Accidents

CY 2018 CY 2017 CY 2016

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation ? 0 NR NR

Postal Regulatory Commission ? 0 NR NR

Presidio Trust ? NR 3 NR

Railroad Retirement Board 0 0 0

Securities and Exchange Commission 1 0 0

Selective Service System ? NR 0 NR

Small Business Administration 0 0 1

Smithsonian Institution 14 15 30

Social Security Advisory Board 0 0 NR

Trade and Development Agency 193 0 1

Legend

No change from 2017 report NR Not reported

Decrease from 2017 report ? Undetermined from reported data

Increase from 2017 report

Management Response to Safety and Health Inspections

As in prior years, federal agencies were asked to report on their internal and external inspection 

activities. Agencies’ responses varied from correcting hazards identified during a formal or informal 

safety inspection, to participating in GSA-led inspections and abatement processes in GSA-leased 

facilities, to consulting with OSHA on abatement methods. In addition to updating policy and 

procedural guidance, most agencies noted that employee and management involvement in inspections 

is critical for an efficient OSH management program. Most agencies encouraged and solicited

employee participation at all organizational levels.

Overall, 80 agencies (91 percent) indicated that they performed at least annual internal OSH program 

inspections or audits during CY 2018. Inspection frequency varied by organization and by workplace. 

Sixty-four agencies carried out inspections at all of their workplaces. Most agencies reported that 

inspections were performed by safety and health staff or supervisors and employees trained in hazard

recognition. A few agencies, such as DHS, also sought assistance from external OSH consultants (e.g.,

Federal Occupational Health) and other federal agencies (e.g., Nuclear Regulatory Commission and 

GSA). Similarly, NASA used contractor personnel for inspection support in addition to the building 

managers, laboratory supervisors, and work area supervisors that perform regularly scheduled 

evaluations of their facilities and work areas. NASA headquarters also provided each of its facilities 

with various independent inspections on a tri-annual schedule to examine and recommend safety and 

health program and process improvements. Almost all agencies indicated that hazards identified 

during inspections/audits were corrected immediately or scheduled for correction on the agencies’ 

action plan for safety and health. In addition, 74 agencies reported analyzing inspection results over 

time to see if patterns of recurring hazards or noncompliance exist.

Most agencies required sub-agencies to use checklists when conducting self-inspections. Completed
39

self-inspection checklists were reviewed by the agency’s headquarters safety staff to determine if there 

were any OSH program weaknesses to be addressed and to provide future corrective action. For 

example, DHS used its Safety and Health Self-Evaluation Checklist program in addition to technical 

assistance visits to evaluate elements of its overall OSH program. DHS sub-agencies used checklists 

when conducting annual self-evaluations of their facilities to ensure compliance with federal and DHS 

safety standards, to identify/control risk, and to prevent workplace injuries by focusing leadership’s 

attention on critical safety and health issues. DHS headquarters safety staff conducted inspections of 

DHS sub-agencies’ facilities to verify the DHS sub-agencies’ self-inspection results, and to confirm 

that DHS sub-agencies had effective internal OSH Programs and facility inspection processes in place. 

Similarly, each bureau of DOJ received safety and health inspection checklists and hazard abatement 

forms to use while conducting gap analysis of their respective OSH programs. Completed checklists 

and abatement forms were submitted to DOJ National Office safety staff for compliance review.

As part of the self-inspection process, many agencies evaluated their hazardous materials management 

program to ensure that SDSs were properly maintained and accessible to employees. Agencies used

the information contained in the SDSs to detect existing or potential hazards and to determine 

appropriate PPE use. In addition, the information contained in the SDSs was used to conduct job 

hazard analysis on new work processes. For example, DOI work sites that used hazardous chemicals 

were required to have a written hazard communication program in place that included processes for 

managing and maintaining chemical inventories, storage and access of SDSs, employee training, 

container labeling, and waste disposal procedures. USAF reported that its safety staff review and 

recommend for approval the use of new chemicals, as required by its Hazardous Materials 

Management Program. USAF requires that local fire, health, and environmental officials approve 

chemicals prior to purchase. When chemicals are received, the USAF local logistics squadron collects

SDSs for the chemicals and adds them to its Hazardous Materials Information Resource System 

database, where safety and health staff, supervisors, and employees can access them. 

Federal Employees Overseas

The provisions of the Act, E.O. 12196, and 29 CFR §1960, which require agencies to provide safe and 

healthful workplaces, have no geographic limits. Agencies were asked to provide information on the 

number of federal employees stationed overseas during CY 2018 and how those employees were 

provided safe and healthful workplaces.

According to agency reports, more than 72,494 employees from 20 federal agencies worked outside 

the United States’ borders during CY 2018. DoD (including the armed services) has 56,785 employees 

overseas, the highest number of any reporting agency.10 DoD (including the armed services) indicated 

that they extended their OSH programs and coverage to include their overseas federal civilian 

employees. Other agencies, such as the Agency for International Development, indicated that they 

relied upon DOS’s Safety, Health, and Environmental Management (SHEM) program to address safety 

and health issues for their overseas employees. 

 

10 DOS did not submit a report in CY 2018, but reported close to 60,000 overseas employees in CY 2017.
40

Table 10: Number of Federal Civilian Employees in Overseas Locations by Agency (FY 2016 through 

CY 2018)

Number of Employees

Agency Status 2018 2017 2016

Department of Agriculture 1,133 900 400

Department of Commerce 1,253 278 NR

Department of Defense 56,785 46,792 39,309

Department of Health and Human Services 464 89 NR

Department of Homeland Security 1,500 2,000 2,100

Department of the Interior 883 1,006 NR

Department of Justice 1,226 1,312 431

Department of Labor 6 53 0

Department of State ? NR 59,666 59,522

Department of Transportation 24 332 NR

Department of the Treasury 41 33 48

Environmental Protection Agency 985 360 183

General Services Administration 22 12 NR

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration 7,536 12 14

African Development Foundation 0 12 NR

Agency for Global Media* 42 32 NR

American Battle Monuments Commission 393 59 NR

Consumer Product Safety Commission 1 1 2

Export-Import Bank 0 1 NR

Millennium Challenge Corporation ? NR 33 26

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2 2 4

Overseas Private Investment Corporation 5 5 5

Peace Corps 187 189 186

Smithsonian Institution 6 620 NR

Trade and Development Agency 0 1 37

Total 72,494 113,800 102,267

Legend

No change from CY 2017 

report

NR Not reported

Decrease from CY 2017 report ? Undetermined from reported data

Increase from CY 2017 report
41

OSH Training and Resources

E.O. 12196 requires agencies to provide OSH training for all employees, and 29 CFR §1960, Subpart 

H, prescribes the necessary OSH training for employees with respect to applicable standards. In their 

reports to OSHA, most agencies stated that they provided OSH training to employees using 

conventional methods, such as online (55 agencies (62 percent)) and/or classroom training (46 

agencies (52 percent)). For example, NASA reported that it used a large suite of safety training, 

available online and through classroom opportunities, to train its employees. NASA employees also 

received training from professional agencies, such as National Fire Protection Association and OSHA, 

and by attending numerous conferences. NASA OSH professionals completed more than 1,075 hours 

of training in CY 2018. Thirty agencies (34 percent) reported that they offered collateral duty OSH 

personnel a safety and health training course in CY 2018.

Thirty-one agencies (35 percent) reported providing employees with the opportunity to participate in 

the FY 2018 OSHA FEDWEEK. In addition, 28 agencies (32 percent) reported that employees 

received training from OTI and 16 agencies (18 percent) received training from OSHA Education 

Centers. Forty-three agencies (49 percent) indicated that they provide support by encouraging OSH 

employees to participate in FFSHC activities. 

Agencies were asked to report on their OSH training efforts for newly hired employees as well as for 

supervisors. Most agencies reported that their new-hire orientation includes information on agencyspecific safety and health policies, general safety and health rules, and emergency procedures. 

Supervisory training included a review of the topics covered in new-hire orientation, as well as a 

review of 29 CFR §1960 and E.O. 12196. Other topics covered in supervisory training included

OSHA compliance, accident analysis, and hazard communication. 

Most agencies provided OSHA with details regarding funds dedicated to OSH training efforts. Sixtyeight agencies (77 percent) reported that supervisors have the authority to requisition training, although 

funds for training varied dramatically by agency.

Whistleblower Protection Programs

As required by 29 CFR §1960, Subpart G, agencies must have procedures in place to assure that no 

employee is subject to restraint, interference, coercion, discrimination, or reprisal for filing a report of 

an unsafe or unhealthful working condition. To assess agencies’ whistleblower protection programs, 

OSHA asked agencies to provide information regarding any federal employee allegations of reprisal 

reported in CY 2018. In addition, agencies were asked to address how allegations were investigated 

and what impact investigation findings had on the agencies’ OSH programs. In all, 85 agencies (97 

percent) reported that they have functional whistleblower protection programs. 

During CY 2018, three agencies reported investigating allegations of reprisal. DOL, DOT, and the 

Smithsonian Institution investigated claims of reprisal, and all were found unsubstantiated.

Product Safety Programs 

In CY 2018, agencies were asked how they ensure that the products and services they procure comply

with the product safety requirements of 29 CFR §1960.34, including the use of SDSs. Of the 

responding agencies, 66 agencies (75 percent) reported compliance with the standard, 19 agencies (22 

percent) reported that such product safety programs do not exist in their agencies, and three agencies (3 

percent) did not respond to OSHA’s request for this information. 
42

In addition to describing their compliance with the provisions of the standard, agencies were asked to 

provide details on the policies they have in place to handle chemicals in fragrances, such as those in 

perfumes and air fresheners. In total, 59 agencies (67 percent) indicated that they have no policy in 

place regarding chemicals in fragrances, 26 agencies (30 percent) indicated that they recently 

developed policies to address the issue of employees with chemical and/or fragrance sensitivities, and 

three agencies (3 percent) provided a response to this question in their report. 

Most agencies indicated that their product safety programs were designed, operated, and maintained in 

accordance with safety and health requirements established under 29 CFR §1960, Subpart E. DOI, for 

example, reported that all its bureaus were required to have a written hazard communication program 

in place that addressed the requirements for chemical inventories, SDSs, employee training, container 

labeling, and waste disposal. DOI followed GSA’s green procurement guidelines and utilized GSA 

Advantage to procure chemicals, in order to ensure that products meet applicable safety and health 

requirements. DOI stored its SDSs electronically and kept paper copies of SDSs with their respective 

chemical products. The Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) reported that it utilized

MSDSonline, a VelocityEHS solution, to manage its chemical inventory and SDSs. MSDSonline is a 

cloud-based tool that manages global hazard communication regulatory compliance requirements. 

AFRH collaborated with VelocityEHS on the newly designed MSDSonline, SDS, and Chemical 

Management platform to make it easier for employees to track, manage, and report on hazardous 

chemicals and to provide right-to-know access to SDSs. The SDS program provided easy online or 

offline access to SDSs, the ability to print and scan labels from any smart phone or tablet, and smart 

tools to manage chemical inventories.

EPA continued to operate a robust product safety program. In CY 2018, EPA once again utilized 

ChemWatch, a database that provides access to SDSs for millions of chemicals. Its Safety, Health, and 

Environmental Management Program managers used this repository to learn about the properties and 

potential hazards associated with new chemicals that entered their facilities. According to the agency’s 

report, 97 percent of its locations had procedures in place to ensure that OSH managers were notified 

when new chemicals, such as cleaning chemicals, pesticides, and laboratory chemicals, were 

introduced into the facility. The OSH managers evaluated the SDSs of all new chemicals to determine 

if they posed a safety or health hazard that would require protective measures. OSH personnel at each 

EPA location ensured that hazardous materials were labeled in accordance with current laws or 

regulations to alert users, shippers, employees, emergency action personnel, and others of basic 

information on flammability, toxicity, compatibility, first aid procedures, and emergency handling and 

disposal procedures. They also ensured that appropriate PPE was available and that employees were 

aware of special handling requirements in situations where they exist. In addition, EPA indicated that 

91 percent of its locations have procedures in place to ensure that products are removed from local 

inventories if the manufacturer recalls them (either voluntarily or by order from a regulatory authority).

Specific Agency Reporting Programs 

Under 29 CFR §1960, Subpart E, GSA and NIOSH have the authority to assist federal agencies with 

specific activities affecting employee safety and health. Each year, GSA and NIOSH provide OSHA 

with details on these activities in their annual reports. Specifically, GSA reported on its programs for 

ensuring that federal facilities are designed, operated, and maintained in accordance with OSH 

requirements and best practices. GSA also detailed how it ensured that the products and services 

offered to federal agencies comply with product safety requirements; how safety recalls were 

implemented; and, how federal purchasers were made aware of the safe use of such products. In its 
43

annual report, NIOSH provided OSHA with information on its Request for Technical Assistance11

program and the program’s effect on federal agencies.

General Services Administration 

GSA explained that the safety and health requirements for all federally owned and commercially 

leased facilities were updated. Specifically, GSA revised its Facilities Standards for the Public 

Buildings Service document to reflect OSHA’s final rules on 29 CFR §1910, Subparts D, F, and I, 

which sets design standards and criteria for new buildings, repairs, alterations, and modernizations of 

GSA facilities. GSA also provided agencies with training on the formalized occupancy permit process 

to comply with 29 CFR §1960.34(a)(7). In CY 2018, GSA continued to require all products to meet 

applicable federal and non-government standards, such as those set by EPA, the Underwriters 

Laboratory, and the National Fire Protection Association. GSA noted that if it receives information 

concerning a product recall in the commodity line that it manages, it initiates a review of the product 

line to determine if the item under recall was supplied to agencies. GSA immediately notifies 

suppliers to cease shipments of products associated with a recall. It also identifies customers that have 

ordered the item under recall and provides instructions on how and who to contact concerning the item.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NIOSH received 33 federal ATARs for health hazard evaluations (HHE) in CY 2018. It completed 18 

(55 percent) of those requests. NIOSH also completed 20 HHE requests from prior years. In total, 

NIOSH performed two field investigations and 36 record reviews/consultations in CY 2018. Federal 

agencies’ requests varied by both exposure groups and health problems. Each completed technical 

assistance request addressed multiple exposure groups and/or health issues. For the reporting period, 

the exposure group categories of indoor environmental quality, biological, and chemical accounted for 

a majority of assistance requests. Many of these agencies also requested assistance with health 

problems such as respiratory, cancer, and musculoskeletal issues.

 

11 NIOSH’s response to a federal agency’s Request for Technical Assistance usually involves a HHE: a workplace study to 

learn whether workers are exposed to hazardous materials or harmful conditions. Based on the information provided, 

NIOSH answers an HHE/technical assistance request in one of the following ways: in writing with pertinent information or 

a referral to a more appropriate agency, by telephone to discuss the problems and how they might be solved, or with a visit 

to the workplace. During a visit, NIOSH will meet with the employer and employee representatives to discuss the issues 

and tour the workplace. During one or more visits, NIOSH may review records about exposure and health, interview or 

survey employees, measure exposures, and perform medical testing. At the end of an evaluation, NIOSH will provide a 

written report to the employer and employee representatives. Depending on the type of evaluation, the final report may 

require a development time of a few months to a few years.
44

APPENDICES
45

Appendix 1: Status of Agency Injury and Illness Record Reporting 

Number of Establishments 

Department/Agency Total 

Submitted 

Data 

Submitted 

Usable Data 

AbilityOne 1 1 1

Access Board 1 1 1

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1 0 0

African Development Foundation 1 0 0

Agency for Global Media 29 29 29

Agency for International Development 6 6 6

American Battle Monuments Commission 28 20 20

Armed Forces Retirement Home 2 2 2

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System 5 5 5

Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation 

Board 2 2 2

Commission of Fine Arts 1 0 0

Commission on Civil Rights 5 5 5

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 2 2 2

Consumer Product Safety Commission 3 3 3

Corporation for National and Community 

Service 53 0 0

Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency 9 9 9

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 1 1 1

Department of Agriculture 2,158 906 852

Department of the Air Force 242 242 241

Department of the Army 567 368 328

Department of Commerce 704 616 565

Department of Defense 744 703 676

Department of Education 26 26 24

Department of Energy 53 53 47

Department of Health and Human Services 1,960 1,960 899
46

Number of Establishments 

Department/Agency Total 

Submitted 

Data 

Submitted 

Usable Data 

Department of Homeland Security 1,705 1,049 766

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development 80 1 0

Department of the Interior 2,130 21 6

Department of Justice 1,262 991 812

Department of Labor 986 986 807

Department of the Navy 545 180 167

Department of State 405 405 303

Department of Transportation 861 861 858

Department of the Treasury 1,004 17 6

Department of Veterans Affairs 1,555 1,020 977

Environmental Protection Agency 106 106 101

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 33 0 0

Export-Import Bank 12 12 12

Farm Credit Administration 5 0 0

Federal Communications Commission 16 16 16

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 95 95 95

Federal Election Commission 1 1 1

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 12 12 12

Federal Housing Finance Agency 1 1 1

Federal Labor Relations Authority 7 7 7

Federal Maritime Commission 7 7 6

Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service 1 1 1

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review 

Commission 3 3 3

Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board 1 1 1

Federal Trade Commission 11 0 0

General Services Administration 457 457 441

Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation 1 0 0

Holocaust Memorial Museum 8 8 8
47

Number of Establishments 

Department/Agency Total 

Submitted 

Data 

Submitted 

Usable Data 

Institute of Museum and Library Services 1 1 1

Inter-American Foundation 1 1 1

International Boundary and Water 

Commission 13 13 13

International Trade Commission 1 1 1

James Madison Memorial Fellowship 

Foundation 1 1 1

Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts 1 0 0

Marine Corps 36 36 36

Marine Mammal Commission 1 0 0

Merit Systems Protection Board 9 0 0

Millennium Challenge Corporation 18 0 0

Morris K. Udall & Stewart L. Udall 

Foundation 2 2 2

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration 32 30 29

National Archives and Records 

Administration 42 42 27

National Capital Planning Commission 1 1 1

National Council on Disability 1 1 1

National Credit Union Administration 6 2 2

National Endowment for the Arts 1 1 1

National Endowment for the Humanities 2 0 0

National Gallery of Art 1 1 1

National Labor Relations Board 50 50 50

National Mediation Board 2 2 2

National Science Foundation 1 1 1

National Transportation Safety Board 6 6 6

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7 7 6

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board 1 1 1
48

Number of Establishments 

Department/Agency Total 

Submitted 

Data 

Submitted 

Usable Data 

Occupational Safety and Health Review 

Commission 3 3 3

Office of Government Ethics 1 1 1

Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation 6 0 0

Office of Personnel Management 65 60 60

Office of Special Counsel 1 1 1

Overseas Private Investment Corporation 1 1 1

Peace Corps 1 1 1

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 4 4 4

Postal Regulatory Commission 1 1 1

Presidio Trust 1 1 1

Railroad Retirement Board 40 40 40

Securities and Exchange Commission 11 11 11

Selective Service System 4 0 0

Small Business Administration 181 8 1

Smithsonian Institution 32 32 32

Social Security Administration 1,666 1,666 1,551

Social Security Advisory Board 1 1 1

Tennessee Valley Authority 113 100 100

Trade and Development Agency 1 1 1

Total 20,284 13,350 11,118
49

Appendix 2: Field Federal Safety and Health Councils

Active FFSHCs in CY 2018 – Received Annual Reports by OSHA Region

Region II Region VI

Central New York FFSHC Dallas/Fort Worth FFSHC

Greater New York FFSHC Oklahoma FFSHC

Hudson Valley FFSHC South Texas FFSHC

Puerto Rico FFSHC Region VII

Western New York FFSHC Greater Des Moines FFSHC

Region III Greater Kansas City FFSHC

Hampton Roads FFSHC Greater Omaha FFSHC

Metropolitan Washington, DC FFSHC Greater St. Louis FFSHC

Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC Region VIII

Region IV Denver FFSHC

Atlanta FFSHC Region IX

Central Florida FFSHC Phoenix FFSHC

Coastal Empire FFSHC San Francisco Bay Area FFSHC

Louisville Area FFSHC Region X

Middle Tennessee FFSHC Mt. Rainier FFSHC

Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

North Carolina FFSHC

South Florida FFSHC

Region V

Chicago FFSHC

Detroit FFSHC

Duluth/Superior FFSHC

Minneapolis FFSHC
50

FFSHCs with Appointed Representatives in CY 2018 by Federal Department/Agency 

Armed Forces Retirement Home

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

Department of Agriculture

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 North Carolina FFHSC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC

 San Francisco Bay FFSHC

Department of Commerce

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

Department of Defense

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

Department of Education

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

Department of Energy

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Health and Human Services

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC

Department of Homeland Security

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

 Phoenix FFSHC

 San Francisco FFSHC

 South Florida FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development

 Chicago FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

Department of Justice

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

 San Francisco Bay FFSHC
51

Department of Labor

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Central Florida FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Hudson Valley FFSHC

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

 South Florida FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of State

 South Florida FFSHC

Department of Transportation

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC

Department of Veterans Affairs

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Hudson Valley FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 San Francisco Bay FFSHC

 South Florida FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of the Interior

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC

Department of the Treasury

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 South Florida FFSHC

Environmental Protection Agency

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

General Services Administration

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC

 San Francisco Bay FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

National Aeronautics and Space

Administration

 Central Florida FFSHC

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC
52

National Archives and Records 

Administration  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Greater St. Louis FFSHC

Nuclear Regulatory Commission  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

Occupational Safety and Health Review 

Commission  Middle Tennessee FFSHC

Postal Regulatory Commission  Detroit FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC

Small Business Administration  Puerto Rico FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Social Security Administration  Greater Des Moines FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC

Tennessee Valley Authority  Middle Tennessee FFSHC

Department of the Air Force  Central Florida FFSHC  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Duluth/Superior FFSHC  Greater Omaha FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  South Texas FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Department of the Army  Atlanta FFSHC  Coastal Empire FFSHC  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Greater Des Moines FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Greater St. Louis FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC  South Florida FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Department of the Navy  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC

U.S. Postal Service  Atlanta FFSHC  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Greater Des Moines FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater St. Louis FFSHC  Hudson Valley FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC  Phoenix FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC
53

FFSHCs with Non-Appointed Representatives in CY 2018 by Federal Department/ 

Agency 

Armed Forces Retirement Home

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

Department of Agriculture

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Central Florida FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 San Francisco FFSHC

Department of Commerce

 Denver FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Louisville Area FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 Oklahoma FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Defense

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Hampton Roads FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

 Oklahoma FFSHC

 San Francisco FFSHC

Department of Energy

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Hampton Roads FFSHC

Department of Health and Human Services

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

Department of Homeland Security

 Chicago FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Hampton Roads FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 Oklahoma FFSHC

 Phoenix FFSHC

 San Francisco Bay FFSHC

 South Florida FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Justice

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 San Francisco FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Labor 

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Central Florida FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Hampton Roads FFSHC

 Hudson Valley FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 North Carolina FFSHC

 Oklahoma FFSHC
54

 Puerto Rico FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Department of Transportation  Denver FFSHC  Duluth/Superior FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  Oklahoma FFSHC

Department of Veterans Affairs  Central Florida FFSHC  Central New York FFSHC  Chicago FFSHC  Greater Des Moines FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Greater Omaha FFSHC  Hudson Valley FFSHC  Louisville Area FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Department of the Interior  Atlanta FFSHC  Central Florida FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Louisville FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  San Francisco FFSHC

Department of the Treasury  Chicago FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC  South Florida FFSHC

Environmental Protection Agency  Chicago FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC

Federal Mediation and Conciliation

Service  Western New York FFSHC

General Services Administration  Atlanta FFSHC  Central Florida FFSHC  Chicago FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Greater Des Moines FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration  Central Florida FFSHC  Hampton Roads FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

National Labor Relations Board  Atlanta FFSHC

Postal Regulatory Commission  Hudson Valley FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Phoenix FFSHC  Puerto Rico FFSHC

Railroad Retirement Board  Chicago FFSHC

Small Business Administration  Western New York FFSHC

Social Security Administration  Chicago FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Phoenix FFSHC  San Francisco Bay FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Tennessee Valley Authority
55

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

Department of the Air Force  Atlanta FFSHC  Central Florida FFSHC  Central New York FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Duluth/Superior FFSHC  Hampton Roads FFSHC  Hudson Valley FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  Oklahoma FFSHC  South Texas FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Department of the Army  Atlanta FFSHC  Central New York FFSHC  Coastal Empire FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Hampton Roads FFSHC  Louisville Area FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  San Francisco FFSHC  South Florida FFSHC

Department of the Navy  Central Florida FFHSC  Hampton Roads FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC U.S. Postal Service  Atlanta FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Louisville Area FFSHC  Oklahoma FFSHC  San Francisco FFSHC
56

Departments/Agencies that Appointed New Representatives to FFSHCs in CY 2018

Armed Forces Retirement Home

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

Department of Agriculture

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Greater Des Moines FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC

Department of Commerce

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

Department of Defense

 Detroit FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

Department of Education

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

Department of Energy

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

Department of Health and Human Services

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

Department of Homeland Security

 Chicago FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Detroit FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Phoenix FFSHC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC

 South Florida FFSHC

Department of Housing and Urban

Development

 Chicago FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

Department of Justice

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

Department of Labor

 Atlanta FFSHC

 Central Florida FFSHC

 Chicago FFSHC

 Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC

 Denver FFSHC

 Duluth/Superior FFSHC

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Greater New York FFSHC

 Greater Omaha FFSHC

 Greater St. Louis FFSHC

 Hampton Roads FFSHC

 Hudson Valley FFSHC

 Middle Tennessee FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC

 Mt. Rainier FFSHC

 Western New York FFSHC

Department of Transportation

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC

 Minneapolis FFSHC

 Puerto Rico FFSHC
57

Department of Veterans Affairs  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Greater Des Moines FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Greater Omaha FFSHC  Greater St. Louis FFSHC  Hudson Valley FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC  North Carolina FFSHC  Northeastern Pennsylvania FFSHC  San Francisco FFSHC  South Florida FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Department of the Interior  Denver FFSHC  Duluth/Superior FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  Puerto Rico FFSHC

Department of the Treasury  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC

Environmental Protection Agency  Duluth/Superior FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC

General Services Administration  Denver FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC  San Francisco FFSHC

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration  Central Florida FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC

National Archives and Records 

Administration  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Greater St. Louis FFSHC

Occupational Safety and Health Review

Commission  Middle Tennessee FFSHC

Postal Regulatory Commission  Detroit FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC

Social Security Administration  Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC  San Francisco FFSHC

Tennessee Valley Authority  Middle Tennessee FFSHC

Department of the Air Force  Central Florida FFSHC  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Duluth/Superior FFSHC  Greater Omaha FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC  South Texas FFSHC  Western New York FFSHC Department of the Army  Atlanta FFSHC  Coastal Empire FFSHC  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Denver FFSHC  Detroit FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC  Mt. Rainier FFSHC

Department of the Navy  Dallas/Ft. Worth FFSHC  Middle Tennessee FFSHC  Minneapolis FFSHC  Mississippi Gulf Coast FFSHC
58

U.S. Postal Service

 Greater Kansas City FFSHC  Greater New York FFSHC
59

Appendix 3: Agency Requests to NIOSH for Technical Assistance

Technical Assistance Requests, and Completed Investigations by Type 

CY 2016 through CY 2018

Technical Assistance 

Requests

Completed Investigation by Type

Desktop Field

Department/ 

Agency 2018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016 2018 2017 2016

Agriculture 3 2 3 4 2

Commerce 1 1

Defense 7 9 9 10 3 5 1 1

Energy 1 1 1

General Services 1

Health and

Human Services 1 2 1 1

Homeland 

Security 3 7 2 4 3 3 1

Interior 3 3

Justice 2 2 4 2 1

U.S. Postal 

Service 6 1 1 2 2

Social Security 

Administration

2 2 4 4 5

Transportation 1 1 2 1

State

Treasury 1 3 4

Veterans Affairs 6 9 6 9 5 4 1 1

Other 3 2 7 3 2

Total 33 38 43 36 20 32 2 6 4
60

2018 Assistance Requests by Department/Agency and Exposure Group 

Exposure Group*

Department/Agency

ChemicalBiologicIndoor Environmental QualityNoiseHeatStressRadiationErgonomics

Agriculture 1 1 1

Commerce

Defense 2 2 3 2

Energy 1 1

General Services

Health and Human Services 1 1

Homeland Security 2 0 2 1 1

Interior

Justice 1 1 1

Labor 1 1 1

U.S. Postal Service 2 2 4 1

Social Security 1 2

Transportation 1 1

Treasury

Veterans Affairs 2 3 4

Other

Total 12 12 20 1 0 1 2 2

* A Request for Technical Assistance, also known as a Health Hazard 

Evaluation request, may involve an investigation under more than one 

exposure group category. This is illustrated by DoD’s single request to 

investigate two exposure groupings: “Biologic” and “Indoor 

Environmental Quality.”
61

2018 Assistance Requests by Department/Agency and Health Problem 

Health Problem

Department/Agency

RespiratoryViral/BacterialCancerMusculoskeletalMental/BehavioralSensorySkin DisorderNervous System

Agriculture 2 2

Commerce

Defense 2 2 2

Energy 1 1

General Services

Health and Human Services 1

Homeland Security 1 1 1

Interior

Justice 1 1

Labor 1 1

U.S. Postal Service 3 2 1 2

Social Security 1 1

Transportation 1 1

Treasury

Veterans Affairs 3 5 1

Other

Total 16 0 5 3 15 1 1 0
62

Appendix 4: Fatality/Hospitalization/Amputation Incident Summary 

USDA reported nine work-related hospitalizations and one work-related amputation. 

Hospitalization

Fall In two separate incidents, smokejumpers were injured when landing in nonstandard position.

Fall An employee tripped and fell into cut stump while working on a steep slope.

Fall Stair descending incident resulted in dislocated shoulder and fractured elbow.

Fall Fall from bulldozer resulted in puncture injury to the neck.

Heat An employee had heat stress.

Heat 

(Overexertion)

An employee suffered dehydration and rhabdomyolysis from physical exertion and 

altitude.

Struck-by A dislodged boulder struck and broke left leg during fire suppression activities.

Vehicle All-terrain vehicle incident resulted in punctured lung and fractured shoulder. 

Amputation

Caught 

Between

An employee closing a vault door suffered a partial finger amputation when the 

employee’s fingertip got pinched between the door and cabinet of the vault. 

The Department of Commerce reported five hospitalizations. 

Hospitalization

Fall An employee suffered leg injuries due to a fall from a staircase collapse.

Fall An employee tripped and fell over a metal barrier at a gas station. 

Fall An employee tripped and fell while pushing a cart through a doorway. 

Fall An employee tripped over a door threshold and hit a wall. The employee suffered 

broken ribs. 

Vehicle A powered industrial truck (PIT) operator suffered injury when the operator made 

contact and was trapped between a beam and the PIT.

DoD reported three civilian fatalities, eight work-related hospitalizations, and four amputations at the 

Department of the Army, one civilian fatality and one hospitalization at the Army and Air Force 

Exchange Service; one hospitalization at the Defense Commissary Agency; one amputation at the 

Defense Health Agency; one hospitalization at the Defense Information Systems Agency; three 

hospitalizations at the Defense Logistics Agency; 23 hospitalizations at the Department of the Air 

Force; one hospitalization at the DoD Education Activity; one fatality, 12 hospitalizations, and two 

amputations at the Department of the Navy; and one hospitalization at the National Security Agency. 

Army & Air Force Exchange Service – Fatality

Vehicle An employee suffered fatal injuries when the motor vehicle struck a disengaged 

trailer.

Army & Air Force Exchange Service – Hospitalization

Fall An employee worked from a poorly supported ladder. The ladder slipped and 

caused the employee to fall approximately 18.5 feet to the ground below. 

Defense Commissary Agency – Hospitalization

Fall A grocery store employee tripped over the wheel of a shopping cart and was 

injured. 

Defense Health Agency – Amputation

Caught 

Between

An employee suffered a partial finger amputation upon closing a fire-rated door. 

The employee’s finger was caught between the door jam and the door. 

Defense Information Systems Agency – Hospitalization

Fall An employee slipped on an icy parking lot and was injured. 
63

Defense Logistics Agency – Hospitalization

Fall In three separate incidents an employee slipped and fell and was hospitalized. 

Department of the Air Force – Hospitalization

Arc Flash An employee suffered electrical burns because of an arc flash during electrical 

panel work. 

Burn An employee opening a Tray Rationing Unit was sprayed with boiling water and 

suffered severe burn wounds. 

Caught 

Between An employee suffered a de-gloved finger while servicing a bleed valve. 

Fall In four separate incidents, employees suffered injuries because of a misplaced

foot. 

Fall An employee fell through an open ceiling panel and dislocated a shoulder. 

Fall An employee fell after jumping over a drainage ditch and suffered a broken leg. 

Fall An employee fell after standing up from a seated position and suffered arm 

injuries. 

Laceration An employee suffered a laceration when a saw struck the employee. 

Lifting In five separate incidents, an employee lifted an object and was injured. 

Puncture An employee suffered a puncture wound to the thumb while handling a syringe. 

Slip An employee slipped on an icy walkway and was hospitalized. 

Trip An employee tripped over a cable and was hospitalized. 

Vehicle An employee suffered a broken leg because of a vehicle-to-vehicle accident. 

Vehicle A skid steer operator suffered multiple injuries when the skid steer struck a 

manhole cover. 

Department of the Air Force – Amputation

Caught 

Between

An employee suffered a partial finger amputation while clearing a paper shredder 

jam. 

Struck-by An employee was struck by a private motor vehicle and suffered a partial leg 

amputation. 

Department of the Army – Fatality

Fire Two employees suffered fatal injuries when a spark initiated a flash fire in a 

production paint-mixing kitchen. 

Crush An employee suffered a fatal injury after becoming crushed under the bed of an 

all-terrain utility vehicle while performing maintenance. 

Department of the Army – Hospitalization

Fall An employee slipped on a slick floor and was injured.

Fall An employee slipped on slick stairs and suffered a broken leg. 

Fire A firefighter working to extinguish a warehouse fire was hospitalized for smoke 

inhalation. 

Fire An employee was seriously injured when a spark initiated a flash fire in a 

production paint-mixing kitchen.

Fire

An employee carrying out a lithium aluminum hydride reduction was seriously 

injured when hydrogen evolved from the reaction was ignited by an unknown 

ignition source causing a flame with pressure.

Struck-by An employee installing a cushion pack under a boxcar suffered a smashed finger 

when the cushion pack fell on the employee's finger.

Struck-by An employee disassembling a gantry crane was hospitalized after a safety cable 

fell on the employee's head. 

Vehicle An employee operating a vehicle was injured when the vehicle was struck by a 

tractor trailer.
64

Department of the Army – Amputation

Caught 

Between

An employee descending from the top of the rappel tower suffered a partial finger 

amputation when the finger was caught inside of a figure 8 device.

Caught 

Between

An employee performing a dredging operation suffered a partial finger 

amputation. 

Crush

An employee completing maritime operations in a harbor suffered a partial thumb 

amputation when the thumb was crushed between the M/V Kimmswick and the 

barge.

Struck-by An employee repairing a machine suffered a partial finger amputation when the 

toolbox cabinet fell on the finger.

Department of Defense Education Activity – Hospitalization

Trip An employee walking in the cafeteria tripped over a bench and fell. The 

employee suffered a broken arm.

Department of the Navy – Fatality

Vehicle An employee was fatally injured when the employee's rental car collided with a 

bus.

Department of the Navy – Hospitalization

Crush An employee suffered a de-gloved finger while refueling a ship at sea.

Fall An employee fell to the floor while attempting to sit in a chair and was 

hospitalized with injuries.

Fall An employee fell while descending a stair and suffered a knee injury. 

Fall An employee suffered a broken leg after jumping off the bed of a truck.

Heat An employee was hospitalized due to heat stress. 

Struck-by An employee suffered a broken leg while lowering a siren and mast.

Trip An employee was injured and hospitalized after falling while getting off a ship.

Vehicle In two separate incidents, an employee was seriously injured when the vehicle 

they were operating collided with another vehicle. 

Department of the Navy – Amputation

Crush An employee suffered a fingertip crushing injury resulting in a partial finger 

amputation with bone loss.

Laceration An employee using a jointer to trim a deck panel board suffered a partial finger 

amputation when the employee's finger made contact with the blade. 

National Security Agency – Hospitalization

Fire An employee responding to an engraver machine that overheated suffered smoke 

inhalation when the machine caught on fire. 

 

The Department of Energy reported one work-related fatality and six work-related hospitalizations.

Department of Energy – Fatality

Vehicle An employee traveling in a 15-passenger van was fatally injured when the van 

collided with a dump truck. 

Department of Energy – Hospitalization

Caught 

Between

An employee installing a new 13.8kV power line conductor onto a wood power pole 

suffered a finger injury when the employee's finger was caught between the power 

line conductor and the roller/pulley maintaining the conductor. 

Lifting An employee raising a spring-assisted height-adjustable desk suffered a herniated 

disc. 

Vehicle Four employees, traveling in a 15-passenger van, were injured when the van 

collided with a dump truck.
65

The Department of Health and Human Services reported one work-related hospitalization at the 

Administration for Children and Families, one hospitalization at the Administration for Community

Living, and one fatality at the Indian Health Service. 

Administration for Children and Families – Hospitalization

Trip An employee walking to exit parking garage stepped over a guardrail to avoid an 

approaching vehicle and fell to the ground. The employee suffered a broken hip.

Administration for Community Living – Hospitalization

Heat An employee suffered heat stress and fainted. 

Indian Health Service – Fatality

Unknown An employee participating in a conference call exhibited distress and passed away. 

DHS reported one civilian fatality and 27 work-related hospitalizations at U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, one fatality and six hospitalizations at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, one 

hospitalization at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, six hospitalizations at the 

Transportation Security Administration, and four hospitalizations at the U.S. Coast Guard.

Federal Emergency Management Agency – Hospitalization 

Laceration An employee opening front metal stairs on a mobile housing unit suffered a severe 

laceration to the finger when the finger was caught in the stairs. 

Transportation Security Administration – Hospitalization

Assault An employee on temporary duty station status overseas was assaulted and severely 

injured. 

Fall In two separate incidents, an employee lost balance and fell down. 

Strain An employee pulled a muscle while conducting a pat down on a passenger. 

Struck-by An employee was struck-by a falling stack of bags and suffered a knee injury. 

Trip An employee suffered a head injury from tripping on the base of an electric fan and 

falling face down on the floor.

U.S. Coast Guard – Hospitalization

Biological An employee removing old floor tile suffered a physiological reaction to mouse 

droppings and was hospitalized.

Insect An employee was stung by a bee on the head and lost consciousness. 

Laceration An employee suffered a laceration while going down a hatch and was hospitalized.

Unknown An employee completing inspection of passenger vessel displayed uncoordinated 

movements and slurred speech.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection – Fatality

Vehicle An employee was fatally injured during a vehicle to tractor trailer collision. 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection – Hospitalization

Aircraft Crash An employee suffered head trauma because of an aircraft crash landing. 

Bite An employee was bitten by a rattlesnake on the lower right leg and was 

hospitalized.

Bite An employee suffered a dog bite to the forehead and hand.

Fall An employee fell from a horse and was hospitalized. 

Fall An employee climbing a 20-foot high fence slipped and fell to the ground. The 

employee suffered a head injury and was hospitalized. 

Fall An employee on the roof of a warehouse suffered arm and leg injuries after falling 

through the roof to the floor 20 feet below. 

Laceration An employee, opening a box with a box cutter, suffered a forearm laceration when 

the box cutter slipped and cut the employee.

Struck-by An employee suffered a foot injury when it was run over by a truck. 
66

Vehicle On eight separate occasions, an employee was hospitalized after losing control of 

an all-terrain vehicle. 

Vehicle In two separate incidents, an employee was involved in a single vehicle accident 

and suffered a broken bone that required surgery. 

Heat 

(Overexertion)

On six separate occasions, an employee was hospitalized for extreme muscle 

exertion, dehydration, or heat stress. 

Overexertion An employee was hospitalized with a broken clavicle while engaging in training 

exercises. 

Overexertion An employee suffered a collapsed lung during a steel baton evaluation and was 

hospitalized.

Overexertion An employee suffered a broken hyoid bone from being put in a head lock during 

training exercises. 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Fatality

Illness An employee passed away after contracting a serious illness while on temporary 

duty in Indonesia.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Hospitalization

Illness In two separate incidents, an employee was hospitalized for becoming disoriented 

while participating in classroom training. 

Illness An employee performing forensic analysis utilizing a computer was hospitalized 

with chest pain.

Firearm An employee was holstering a weapon was hospitalized when the weapon 

discharged and a bullet struck the employee. 

Unknown In two separate incidents, an employee was hospitalized after completing firearm 

qualifications. 

DOJ reported two civilian fatalities at the U.S. Marshals Service; one fatality at the Bureau of Alcohol, 

Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; one fatality, six hospitalizations, and seven amputations at the 

Bureau of Prisons; and seven hospitalizations at the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives – Fatality

Overexertion An employee engaged in workplace training died from a heart attack due to 

overexertion.

Bureau of Prisons – Fatality

Struck-by An employee, mowing grass near a pond, was fatally injured when the lawn mower 

turned over into the pond and trapped the employee underneath.

Bureau of Prisons – Hospitalization

Electrical 

An employee putting an electrical plug into a receptacle was injured when the 

employee made contact with the prongs of the electrical plug while it was entering 

the receptacle.

Fall In three separate incidents, an employee suffered a broken bone after slipping on a 

wet surface. 

Fall An employee slipped on grease spot on the floor and suffered a broken leg.

Struck-by An employee unloading food cans from a pallet on a loading dock was hospitalized 

due to loss of consciousness when a can of food exploded in the employee's face. 

Bureau of Prisons – Amputation

Caught 

Between

In two separate incidents, an employee suffered a fingertip amputation when a door 

closed on the employee's hand.

Caught 

Between

An employee pushing a cart through a doorway suffered a finger amputation when 

the employee's hand was caught between the cart and the door frame. 
67

Crush An employee driving a lawn mower up incline suffered a fingertip amputation 

when the mower overturned and landed on the employee’s hand. 

Crush An employee cleaning a heavy condenser plate suffered a fingertip amputation 

when the plate slammed the finger down against a concrete surface. 

Laceration An employee, using a table saw to cut tile, suffered a finger amputation.

Laceration An employee adjusting the cutting blade on a meat slicer suffered a partially 

amputated thumb.

Federal Bureau of Investigation – Hospitalization

Fall An employee participating in a climbing training exercise was hospitalized after 

falling and fracturing vertebrae. 

Fall An employee slipped on a wet floor and suffered a broken hip.

Firearm An employee experienced a gunshot wound in the line of duty. 

Overexertion In two separate incidents, an employee participating in strenuous training was

hospitalized after becoming dehydrated.

Overexertion An employee was injured while making an arrest. 

Vehicle An employee operating a snowmobile was injured when the snowmobile struck a 

tree.

U.S. Marshals Service – Fatality

Firearm Two employees were struck by gunfire and fatally injured while executing a 

warrant.

DOL reported two work-related hospitalizations and three work-related amputations at the Job Corps. 

Job Corps – Hospitalization

Vehicle A student driving all-terrain vehicle was hospitalized with injuries after the vehicle 

struck a tree. 

Job Corps – Amputation

Caught 

Between

A student mounting a rear tire on a backhoe suffered a partial finger amputation 

when the tire fell and caught the student's finger between the rear axle of the 

backhoe and the tire rim. 

Caught 

Between

A student polishing a rotating aluminum piece in a lathe suffered a finger 

amputation when an ACE bandage the student was wearing was pulled into the 

piece.

Crush A student cranking a jack attached to a trailer suffered a foot amputation when the 

jack weld failed causing the trailer to swing sideways and fall on the student's foot. 

Laceration An employee operating a band saw suffered a partial finger amputation when the 

saw slipped and struck the employee’s fingers.

VA reported one civilian fatality, 15 work-related hospitalizations, and one amputation at the Veterans 

Health Administration; one fatality at the Office of Information and Technology; and one amputation 

at the Veterans Canteen Service. 

Office of Information and Technology – Fatality

Electrical An employee made contact with an energized circuit and was electrocuted.

Veterans Canteen Service – Amputation

Laceration An employee suffered a partial finger amputation when the employee's finger made 

contact with a cheese slicer.

Veterans Health Administration – Fatality

Firearm An employee attending a meeting was fatally injured when an armed gunman 

entered the meeting.
68

Veterans Health Administration – Hospitalization

Assault A pregnant employee was kicked in the stomach by a patient. 

Assault An employee was hospitalized after hyperventilating and experiencing chest pains 

in response to the behavior of a patient. 

Chemical In two separate incidents, an employee experienced a respiratory reaction to 

chemicals. 

Chemical An employee suffered a serve allergic reaction to a flu vaccine. 

Fall In two separate incidents, an employee mis-stepped a foot and fell. 

Fall An employee slipped on water that had spilled onto the breakroom floor. 

Fall An employee tripped on a mat, fell, and suffered a broken leg. 

Fall An employee tripped and fell over a backpack left on the floor. 

Vehicle An employee, operating a motor vehicle, was hospitalized after the vehicle struck a 

deer. 

Veterans Health Administration – Amputation

Crush An employee, pushing a cart, suffered a partial finger amputation when the cart fell 

and the employee's finger was caught between the cart and the floor. 

DOI reported two civilian fatalities and 18 work-related hospitalizations at the National Park Service, 

one hospitalization at the Bureau of Indian Affairs, one fatality and four hospitalizations at the Bureau 

of Land Management, two hospitalizations at the Bureau of Reclamation, six hospitalizations at the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and one hospitalization at the U.S. Geological Survey.

Bureau of Indian Affairs – Hospitalization

Heat An employee was hospitalized with heat exhaustion after completing a work 

capacity test. 

Bureau of Land Management – Fatality

Fall An employee fell from a trail wall and suffered fatal injuries. 

Bureau of Land Management – Hospitalization

Fall An employee, performing a smoke-jumping exercise, was injured when the 

parachute stalled causing the jumper to land in a seated position. 

Struck-by A firefighter was struck-by a falling tree branch. 

Smoke A firefighter was exposed to a prolonged period of heavy smoke. 

Vehicle An employee operating a motor vehicle suffered a broken arm when the vehicle left 

the road, causing the air bag to inflate. 

Bureau of Reclamation - Hospitalization

Biological An employee, exposed to bird droppings while performing work duties, was 

hospitalized with histoplasmosis in both lungs. 

Heat An employee, working outdoors, suffered heat exhaustion. 

National Park Service – Fatality

Drowning An employee died while completing a required swimming test for diving 

certification. 

Struck-by An employee, cutting a tree, was killed when the tree fell and struck the employee. 

National Park Service – Hospitalization

Bite An employee was bitten by a tick while performing a traffic stop, and suffered 

subsequent illness.

Bite A snake bit an employee cleaning up plant debris. 

Electric An employee, while hiking, was hit by a ground current from a nearby lightning 

strike and was hospitalized. 

Fall In three separate incidents, an employee slipped on a wet surface and was injured. 

Fall An employee suffered multiple injuries from falling on the stairs. 
69

Fall An employee fell from a ladder and suffered multiple fractures. 

Firearm An employee sustained a gunshot wound while taking part in a US Park Police 

SWAT Team Operation. 

Firearm An employee was struck-by a ricocheted bullet during target practice. 

Heat In two separate incidents, an employee suffered heat exhaustion while working 

outside and was hospitalized. 

Overexertion An employee was hospitalized after losing consciousness while completing a swim 

test. 

Struck-by An employee was hospitalized with a concussion after striking his head on a door 

jam. 

Strain An employee, participating in training, sustained a knee injury. 

Struck-by An employee was tamping material around a wooden post and sustained a hand 

injury when the employee’s knuckle struck a protruding sliver of wood on the post. 

Unknown An employee, performing maintenance activities, lost consciousness and was 

hospitalized. 

Vehicle An employee, operating a motorcycle, suffered a leg injury when the motorcycle 

fell on the employee. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Hospitalization

Bite An employee was attacked by an adult male grizzly bear and suffered bite wounds. 

Fall An employee, climbing a tree, suffered multiple fractures after falling 20 feet to the 

ground. 

Fall In two separate incidents, an employee slipped on a wet surface and was injured. 

Strain An employee suffered a pulled groin and subsequent blood clots after standing up 

from a bent position. 

Vehicle An employee developed blood clots in the leg from driving long hours in a motor 

vehicle. 

U.S. Geological Survey – Hospitalization

Biological An employee, wading in a stream, suffered a water-borne bacterial infection and 

was hospitalized. 

Department of the Treasury – Amputation

Crush An employee, cleaning a desk with a hutch, suffered a partial finger amputation 

when the hutch titled forward and struck the employee’s hand. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation – Hospitalization

Vehicle An employee, operating a motor vehicle, was injured when the vehicle hit an 

asphalt roller. 

Federal Trade Commission – Hospitalization

Fall An employee slipped and fell on a marble floor and sustained an arm injury. 

General Services Administration – Fatality

Vehicle An employee, operating a motor vehicle, was fatally injured when the vehicle 

struck a disabled vehicle. 

Smithsonian Institution - Hospitalization

Bite An employee stuck an arm between a gate support pole and the gate to pet an 

agitated wolf and was subsequently bitten on the hand by the wolf. 

Fall An employee fell off the loading dock and suffered a head injury. 

Fall An employee stumbled and fell when exiting an elevator. 

Fire An employee, participating in a meeting, suffered burns when batteries in the 

employee’s electronic cigarette caught fire while in the employee’s pocket. 
70

Social Security Administration – Amputation

Laceration An employee, using a block of wood to keep a fan blade on an exhaust fan from 

moving, suffered a finger amputation when the block of wood shifted. 

Tennessee Valley Authority – Hospitalization

Fall An employee suffered a broken leg after slipping on a wet surface and falling to the 

ground.