Back to Federal guidance

Bloodborne pathogen rule for oilwell service first aid

Summary An oilwell service association asked whether OSHA's bloodborne pathogens rule applied outside health care. OSHA said employees assigned to provide first aid could have reasonably anticipated blood contact and were covered, while workers without that exposure were not. It distinguished unanticipated Good Samaritan acts and described a then-current vaccination enforcement policy for collateral first aid duties.
Document
Federal opinion letter
Agency
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Document number
1992-09-09
Date issued
September 9, 1992
Status
Active
Status last verified October 9, 2026

Apply this to your situation

This page explains the general guidance. Ask about your specific situation and see what current federal labor law says, with citations.

About this page: The full text below is the official document from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Ezel adds the plain-English summary and tracks the document's status. The official source linked on this page is authoritative for any reliance.

September 9, 1992

Mr. Mike Clark
Executive Vice President
Association of Oilwell
Servicing Contractors
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Clark:

This is in further response to your letter of July 10, addressed to The Honorable Lynn Martin, Secretary of Labor, regarding the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulation, 29 CFR 1910.1030, "Occupational Exposure to Bloodborne Pathogens." Specifically, you expressed concern that the standard is applicable to the oilfield industry and other non- health care industries. Please accept our apology for the delay in this response.

The bloodborne pathogens standard addresses the broad issue of occupational exposure to blood and other potentially infectious materials and is not meant solely for employees in health care settings. Since there is no population that is risk free for human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis B virus infectivity, any employee who has occupational exposure to blood or other potentially infectious materials is included within the scope of this standard.

It is important to note that occupational exposure is defined as reasonably anticipated skin, eye, mucous membrane, or parenteral contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials that may result from the performance of an employee's duties. OSHA anticipates that this standard will impact upon your industry in a similar fashion as upon other non-health care industries, i.e., that employees who are designated as responsible for rendering first aid or medical assistance as part of their job duties are to be covered by this standard. This is because it is reasonable to anticipate that an employee designated to render first aid will have occupational exposure to blood or other potentially infectious materials. Employees who perform unanticipated "Good Samaritan" acts are not covered by the standard since such actions do not constitute occupational exposure as defined by the standard.

OSHA has issued a policy statement specifying that, while designated first aiders are covered under the scope of the standard, failure to offer the hepatitis B vaccine pre-exposure to persons who render first aid only as a collateral duty will be considered a de minimis violation carrying no penalties, provided that a number of conditions are met (see enclosed news release). All other requirements of the standard continue to apply to designated first aid providers.

You also expressed concern that compliance with the requirements of the standard may be burdensome for non-health care employers. You should note, however, that it is the employer's responsibility to determine which job classifications involve occupational exposure, and that the employer is required to make the Hepatitis B vaccine available and to provide the other protections of the standard only to those employees having occupational exposure. In workplace facilities such as you have described in your industry, only certain designated employees may have duties which involve occupational exposure. Costs associated with recordkeeping and other requirements may therefore be limited and controlled by the employer.

We hope this information is responsive to your concerns. Thank you for your interest in employee safety and health.

Sincerely,
Patricia K. Clark, Director
Directorate of Compliance Programs

What does federal law require in your situation?

Ezel checks current federal labor law against your facts and answers with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace