Job13

406 letters · 1975–2026

What OSHA has actually decided about recordkeeping

The regulation states the rule. These letters are OSHA's own answers to specific questions people asked it — whether paraffin wax is medical treatment, whether a case is recordable when the employee declines treatment. Every letter here cites 29 CFR Part 1904 and is reproduced in full.

How to read these — and what they are not

A Letter of Interpretation is OSHA answering a specific question on specific facts. In OSHA’s own standing words, they “explain these requirements and how they apply to particular circumstances, but they cannot create additional employer obligations.”

So a letter is persuasive authority about how OSHA reads the rule — not a substitute for the rule, and not automatically transferable to facts that differ from the ones the letter addressed. Later letters can supersede earlier ones; they are listed newest first.

Job13 never lets a letter change a determination. The recordability check decides on the regulation alone and shows the relevant letters alongside, as authority to read — never as the reason for the answer.

Search the corpus

Every Part 1904 interpretation

Filter by topic or by the section the letter interprets.

406 interpretations — showing 40

Coverage and provenance

  • 406 letters citing 29 CFR Part 1904, harvested 2026-07-19 from osha.gov and reproduced verbatim.
  • Found by enumerating 6,007 interpretation URLs and keeping those that cite Part 1904; 5,533 cite other standards and are out of scope.
  • 68 enumerated URLs no longer resolve on osha.gov and are therefore not included. We report that rather than implying the corpus is exhaustive.
  • OSHA letters are US Government works in the public domain (17 U.S.C. § 105).

Not legal advice. This page republishes 29 CFR Part 1904 as published by the eCFR and explains it. The recordkeeping duty is the employer’s. Where the rule requires judgement, Job13 says so rather than guessing — run your own case through the free check.