View Rule

Statement of Need: A revision to OSHA's outdated recordkeeping system has been contemplated for some time. The process of revision originated in BLS in 1987 and moved in 1990 to OSHA, when the recordkeeping function was transferred to the Agency. ^PThe proposed rule reflects the input of many stakeholders, including OSHA field and national office staff, the participants in the 1987 Keystone policy dialogue, staff from other government agencies (BLS, MSHA, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) NIOSH and the States), and members of OSHA's advisory committees. OSHA has discussed the proposed revision with thousands of employers and representatives of the safety/health community in over 100 presentations for employer groups, trade associations, safety councils, and union groups. ^PRecently, OSHA shared copies of the draft proposal with stakeholders from labor, industry, trade associations, and other government agencies. The proposal also was reprinted in several occupational safety and health trade publications, and OSHA held two stakeholder meetings to discuss the proposal and obtain feedback. As a result of this recent stakeholder input, OSHA made over 50 changes to the document. Although the various stakeholders did not agree on every detail of the proposal, OSHA is confident that the multiphase process followed in developing this proposal has resulted in substantial agreement on the issues and consensus on the desirability of publishing the proposal in the Federal Register to enable OSHA to obtain input from the public at large. ^PThe occupational injury and illness records maintained by employers are an important component of OSHA's program. The records are used by employers and employees to discover and evaluate workplace safety and health hazards, and they provide OSHA personnel with necessary information during workplace inspections. The records also provide the source data for the Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses conducted by the BLS. ^PThe records have their greatest value when they are used by employers and employees to manage and develop workplace safety and health programs. These records are an effective way to quantify a firm's injury and illness experience. When problems are quantified and presented to employers and employees, they are much more likely to be solved. Hazardous conditions, departments and jobs also can be identified by reviewing injury and illness records. Once hazards are discovered and corrective actions are taken, the records can be used to monitor the effectiveness of control approaches taken. Employers and employees can also use injury and illness records to develop and operate safety and health programs. When information on workplace injuries and illnesses is not available or is incorrect, the ability to identify problems and take corrective action is diminished. ^PThe Government also has several uses for injury and illness records. These records are used by OSHA safety and health inspectors during worksite visits to highlight potential problems that require additional scrutiny. The records are the source documents for the Bureau of Labor Statistics Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, the nation's primary source of information on workplace injury and illness. The resulting statistics on the frequency, rate, and factors contributing to job-related injury and illness are used to measure the performance of the Nation's safety and health policies, determine regulatory actions, and provide a point of comparison for an individual company's safety and health performance. The statistics are also used by NIOSH, academia, and other safety and health researchers to determine trends, discover emerging occupational conditions, and evaluate occupational safety and health policies. ^PThe records will also be the source documents for OSHA's data collection initiative. This program will allow OSHA to use limited resources to focus intervention efforts (e.g.,consultation, training, outreach, and enforcement) on worksites with the highest injury and illness rates. The data collection initiative will also provide OSHA with a means for measuring its performance in terms of outcomes--changes in workplace injury and illness--rather than activities.

Alternatives: One alternative to publication of the proposed revision is to take no action and continue to administer the injury and illness recordkeeping system using the current regulation, forms and guidelines. Another alternative is to publish the proposal without changing the coverage and scope of the rule (i.e., continue the current rule's small employer and Standard Industrial Classification exemptions). ^PThe first alternative is unacceptable because it does not address the recognized problems of the current system. The second alternative is also unacceptable. Evaluation of the most current injury and illness data available shows that modification of the existing coverage (of small employers and employers in certain Standard Industrial Classification Codes) will lead to the collection of more injury and illness information and reduce the paperwork burden on employers with smaller-sized establishments and those operating in less hazardous private industry sectors.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits: The average establishment affected by the proposed changes to the recordkeeping requirements would incur a net reduction in recordkeeping costs. Thus the proposed rule will not impose adverse economic impacts on firms in the regulated community. The proposed exemption from the regulation of all nonconstruction establishments with fewer than 20 employees will mean that small entities are likely to experience the greatest cost savings.

Risks: Benefits will include: (a) a system that is more compatible with and easier for government to use; (b) more reliable and useful records; (c) construction sites; and (d) greater employee involvement.