The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued a letter of interpretation clarifying whether injuries resulting from the use of personal rechargeable lithium-ion batteries in the workplace should be recorded as work-related on the OSHA Forms 300, 301, and 300-A or equivalent forms.

The letter addressed a scenario in which employees bring rechargeable lithium-ion batteries from home to the workplace for use in e-cigarettes, and that are not used in any equipment or device related to employee work duties. In this scenario, the battery terminals are unprotected and the employee or employees improperly carry these batteries in their pants pocket, a fire is sparked by the batteries, and that the fire results in employee injury.

If a work-related injury caused by a lithium-ion battery meets one or more of the general recording criteria in Section 1904.7 of the Recording and Reporting Occupational Injuries and Illnesses standard, it must be recorded on the OSHA logs.

OSHA’s Response: “No, section 1904.5(b)(3) of OSHA’s recordkeeping regulation does not apply in this scenario, assuming that the employee was at your workplace during assigned work hours and present as a condition of employment.”

However the Notice of Interpretation letter addresses recordkeeping requirements and highlights the growing need for awareness of safety risks associated with lithium-ion batteries in workplace environments. These batteries can pose safety and health risks to workers during manufacturing, usage, emergency response, disposal, and recycling. Potential risks include fires, explosions, and exposure to harmful chemicals.

Safety measures employers can take include implementing hazard controls during battery design and production; ensuring proper ventilation; storing batteries in cool, dry locations; monitoring storage areas for flammable and toxic gases; using designated recycling facilities for disposal; and providing safety showers and eyewash stations when handling battery materials.

A Letter of Interpretation is OSHA’s official response to questions about how its requirements apply to specific workplace situations or hazards. They cannot create additional employer obligations. Each letter constitutes OSHA’s interpretation of the requirements discussed. These letters can help stakeholders understand how to comply with Federal OSHA standards, regulations, and section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act in specific workplace situations.

In June, the Department of Labor launched its opinion letter program, which expands the department’s longstanding commitment to providing meaningful compliance assistance that helps workers, employers, and other stakeholders understand how federal labor laws apply in specific workplace situations.

The public is encouraged to use the division’s new opinion letters page to explore past guidance and submit new requests. The division will exercise discretion in determining whether and how it will respond to each request, which will focus primarily on attempting to address issues of broad-based concern.

Learn more about OSHA and safety practices related to lithium-ion batteries.

Note however that California is regulated by Cal/OSHA, which operates under an OSHA-approved state plan (approved in 1973). This means Cal/OSHA has primary authority to enforce occupational safety and health standards for both private-sector and public-sector (state and local government) workplaces in the state.

Under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act), state plans like California’s must be “at least as effective” as federal OSHA standards. Federal OSHA standards serve as a floor (minimum baseline): Cal/OSHA must cover all the same issues addressed by federal standards and cannot be less protective.

Cal/OSHA can (and often does) adopt more stringent or additional standards. California frequently issues rules that exceed federal requirements (e.g., stricter permissible exposure limits for chemicals, more comprehensive heat illness prevention, workplace violence prevention measures, or shorter injury reporting deadlines). In these cases, the more protective Cal/OSHA rule prevails for California employers.

Employers in California must comply with a stricter Cal/OSHA provision if there is one. Federal OSHA does not preempt or override a state plan’s more stringent rules once the plan is approved.