View Rule

OSHA published a proposed rule on July 30, 2018, to remove provisions to the Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses final rule, 81 FR 29624 (May 12, 2016). OSHA proposed to amend its recordkeeping regulation to remove the requirement to electronically submit to OSHA information from the OSHA Form 300 (Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses) and OSHA Form 301 (Injury and Illness Incident Report) for establishments with 250 or more employees which are required to routinely keep injury and illness records. Under the proposed rule, these establishments would be required to electronically submit only information from the OSHA Form 300A (Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses). OSHA also proposed to add the Employer Identification Number (EIN) to the data collection to increase the likelihood that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) would be able to match OSHA-collected data to BLS Survey of Occupational Injury and Illness (SOII) data and potentially reduce the burden on employers who are required to report injury and illness data both to OSHA (for the electronic recordkeeping requirement) and to BLS (for SOII). OSHA is reviewing comments and will publish a final rule in June 2019.

Statement of Need:

The preamble to the May 2016 final rule pointed to publication of the collected data as a method to improve workplace safety and health through the rule’s requirements. OSHA has preliminarily determined that the risk of disclosure of the personally identifiable information (PII) on the OSHA Form 300 and 301, the cost to OSHA of collection and using the information, and the reporting burden on employers are unjustified given the uncertain benefits of collecting the information. 

Summary of the Legal Basis:

OSHA is issuing this proposed rule pursuant to authority expressly granted by sections 8 and 24 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (the OSH Act or Act) (29 U.S.C. 657 and 673).

Alternatives:

The alternative for the proposed changes contained in the NPRM is to retain the existing regulatory language, i.e., retaining the status quo. OSHA has proposed that the benefits of the proposed regulatory change outweigh the costs of those changes. OSHA has requested public comment on feasible alternatives to the Agency’s proposal.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits:

The removal of the case specific requirement reduces costs. OSHA estimates that the rule will have net economic cost savings of $8.75 million per year. The Agency believes that the loss in annual benefits, while unquantified, are significantly less than the annual cost savings, hence there are positive net benefits to this proposed rule.

Risks:

This rulemaking does not address new significant risks or estimate benefits and economic impacts of reducing such risks. Overall, this rulemaking is reasonably necessary under the OSH Act because it provides cost savings, or eliminates unnecessary requirements.