Back to Federal guidance

Recording occupational bloodborne pathogen exposure incidents

Summary An employer asked when a bloodborne pathogen exposure belongs on its injury log. OSHA said contact with non-intact skin or mucous membranes may be recordable when it results in specified consequences, including recommended medical treatment or seroconversion; a splash onto intact skin alone is not an exposure incident under that guidance.
Document
Federal opinion letter
Agency
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Document number
1993-05-27-2
Date issued
May 27, 1993
Status
Archived by the agency
OSHA labels this an archive document and warns that it may no longer represent current policy.
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.

The current status of this document is unclear
OSHA labels this an archive document and warns that it may no longer represent current policy. It may no longer reflect the agency's current position. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance, and verify current law before relying on anything here.
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.

NOTICE: This is an OSHA Archive Document, and may no longer represent OSHA Policy. It is presented here as historical content, for research and review purposes only.

May 27, 1993

Mr. Stephen G. Kastensmidt
B&R
OSHA Recordkeeping
Brown & Root, Inc.
[Recipient address omitted]
Dear Mr. Kastensmidt:

Thank you for your letter of May 13, asking about the proper recording of occupational exposures to bloodborne pathogens. An occupational bloodborne pathogens exposure incident shall be classified and evaluated as an injury since it is usually the result of an instantaneous event. It shall be recorded if it meets one or more of the following requirements:

  1. The incident results in a loss of consciousness, transfer to another job, or a work restriction, and/or

  2. The incident results in the administration or recommendation of medical treatment beyond first aid (e.g., gamma globulin, hepatitis B immune globulin, hepatitis B vaccine, zidovudine, or other prescription medications), and/or

  3. The incident results in a diagnosis of seroconversion.

For recordkeeping purposes, "exposure incident" is defined as "a specific eye, mouth, other mucous membrane, non-intact skin, or parenteral contact with blood or other potentially infectious material..." In addition, "non-intact skin" includes skin with dermatitis, hang-nails, cuts, abrasions, chafing, etc. Therefore, cases involving an "exposure incident" to an employee may be recordable while cases involving a splash to a person's "intact" skin are not recordable.

Under 29 CFR 1904, medical treatment includes treatment that is actually provided as well as treatment that is clearly required but not provided. Thus, recommended treatment need not be rendered to satisfy the recordability criteria. This guidance can be found on page 44 of the Recordkeeping Guidelines, Q&A F-5. This is why Section J(2) of CPL 2-2.44c (enclosed) includes "...the recommendation of medical treatment..." in its recordability requirements.

I hope this information is useful to you. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact my staff at (202) 219-6463.

Sincerely,
Stephen A. Newell
Director
Office of Statistics

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