Back to Federal guidance

Bloodborne pathogen coverage of Alaska custodial work

Summary OSHA reviewed Alaska's response to a complaint about custodians and bloodborne pathogen exposure. It said employers must assess actual tasks and anticipated blood contact case by case; a maintenance or janitorial job title alone cannot establish or rule out coverage. If an investigation finds occupational exposure, the employer must provide the standard's required protections.
Document
Federal guidance
Agency
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Document number
1996-11-01-2
Date issued
November 1, 1996
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.

November 1, 1996

MEMORANDUM FOR: Richard S. Terrill Acting Regional Administrator
Region X

FROM: John B. Miles, Jr., Director
Directorate of Compliance Program

SUBJECT: Response: Bloodborne Pathogen Standard (BBP)
and Alaska CASPA - Code Interpretation

This memorandum is in response to your request for an explanation of OSHA's position and interpretation detailing workers and work activity covered under 29 CFR 1910.1030. We have reviewed your response to the state of Alaska in regards to the CASPA and find your interpretation of the bloodborne pathogens standard (BBP) is correct.

The BBP standard applies to all industries with the exception of construction and longshoring. Under this standard, employers are required to determine which job classifications and which specific tasks and procedures involve or potentially involve occupational exposure to blood and other potentially infectious materials (OPIM). As you clearly stated in your letter to the Commissioner for the Alaska Department of Labor, OSHA would not normally consider maintenance, janitorial, and/or housekeeping personnel in a non-healthcare environment to have occupational exposure to blood and OPIM. However, it is the employer's responsibility to determine whether or not there is occupational exposure with respect to these and all job classifications, worker tasks, and job requirements. The determination of occupational exposure must be made on a case-by-case basis. Neither OSHA nor an employer can rule out or determine that a specific job does not have occupational exposure based solely on the job title.

If a job or task is evaluated by the employer, OSHA, or a state program state, and exposure to blood or OPIM is found to exist, the employer would be held responsible for providing all applicable provisions of the BBP standard to its occupationally exposed workers. We are in agreement with your CASPA determination that an investigation in response to the formal complaint needs to be conducted by the state of Alaska in order to determine if the custodians have occupational exposure. If occupational exposure is determined to exist, then the required provisions of the BBP standard would have to be implemented by the employer.

If you have any further questions or if we can be of any further assistance, please contact [the Office of Health Enforcement at (202) 693-2190].

[Corrected 12/6/2024]

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