Assess New Case vs. Continuation (29 CFR 1904.6)
osha_assess_new_caseDetermine whether a workplace injury or illness is a new case or a recurrence for the OSHA 300 Log, per 1904.6. Returns new_case, not_new_case, or requires_judgment when PLHCP opinions conflict.
Instructions
Determine whether an injury or illness is a NEW case or a continuation of one already on the 300 Log — the second condition of the 1904.4(a) conjunction. Run this after osha_assess_work_relatedness and before osha_assess_recordability, and pass its new_case result through. Key distinctions it settles: a recurrence CAUSED by a workplace exposure is a new case (1904.6(b)(2), e.g. an occupational asthma episode), while a chronic illness whose symptoms recur WITHOUT exposure is recorded only once (1904.6(b)(1)). A PLHCP recommendation, once sought, is binding and overrides the rule logic (1904.6(b)(3)). Returns work_case verdicts of new_case, not_new_case, or requires_judgment — the last when PLHCP opinions conflict or causation is unestablished. Treat requires_judgment as a question for the user, never as a licence to pick. Reference and triage only — not legal advice or a medical determination.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| plhcp_opinion | No | Any physician or licensed health care professional recommendation on whether this is a new case or a recurrence. Under 1904.6(b)(3) an employer need not seek one, but MUST follow it once sought — so this OVERRIDES the rule logic. Use 'conflicting' when two or more PLHCPs disagree; the employer must then decide which is most authoritative. | none |
| causation_is_clear | No | Is it clear whether a workplace event caused the current signs or symptoms, as opposed to the condition simply continuing? Pass false when the narrative does not establish this; the tool will return requires_judgment rather than pick. | |
| recovered_completely_from_prior | No | Had the employee recovered completely from the prior recorded case — ALL signs and symptoms had disappeared — before the current signs or symptoms appeared? (1904.6(a)(2)) | |
| prior_recorded_same_type_same_body_part | Yes | Has the employee previously experienced a RECORDED injury or illness of the same type affecting the same part of the body? (1904.6(a)(1)) If false, the case is new and nothing else needs deciding. | |
| workplace_event_caused_current_symptoms | No | Did an event or exposure in the workplace cause the current signs or symptoms? (1904.6(b)(2)) An episode of occupational asthma triggered by a workplace exposure is a new case even though the asthma itself is not new. | |
| chronic_recurs_without_workplace_exposure | No | Is this an occupational illness whose signs or symptoms may recur or continue in the ABSENCE of a workplace exposure? Examples may include occupational cancer, asbestosis, byssinosis and silicosis (1904.6(b)(1)). This is a description of character, NOT a closed list of illnesses — judge the condition, do not match the name. Such cases are recorded once only. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| kind | Yes | ||
| value | Yes | ||
| cfr_cite | Yes | ||
| source_url | Yes | ||
| last_verified | Yes |