Alert: Due to routine maintenance on the OSHA website, some pages may be temporarily unavailable.
To report an emergency, file a complaint with OSHA or ask a safety and health question, call 1-800-321-6742 (OSHA).

  [Federal Register Volume 83, Number 88 (Monday, May 7, 2018)]
  [Rules and Regulations]
  [Pages 19936-19949]
  From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
  [FR Doc No: 2018-09306]
  
  
  =======================================================================
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
  
  Occupational Safety and Health Administration
  
  29 CFR Part 1910
  
  [Docket No. OSHA-2018-0003]
  RIN 1218-AB76
  
  
  Revising the Beryllium Standard for General Industry
  
  AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 
  Department of Labor.
  
  ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comment.
  
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  SUMMARY: On January 9, 2017, the Occupational Safety and Health 
  Administration (OSHA) issued a final rule adopting a comprehensive 
  general industry standard for exposure to beryllium and beryllium 
  compounds. In this Direct Final Rule (DFR), OSHA is adopting a number 
  of clarifying amendments to address the application of the standard to 
  materials containing trace amounts of beryllium. OSHA believes this 
  rule will maintain safety and health protections for workers while 
  reducing the burden to employers of complying with the current rule.
  
  DATES: This DFR will become effective on July 6, 2018 unless 
  significant adverse comment is submitted (transmitted, postmarked, or 
  delivered) by June 6, 2018. If DOL receives significant adverse 
  comment, the Agency will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
  Register informing the public that this DFR will not take effect (see 
  Section III, ``Direct Final Rulemaking,'' for more details on this 
  process). Comments to this DFR, hearing requests, and other information 
  must be submitted (transmitted, postmarked, or delivered) by June 6, 
  2018. All submissions must bear a postmark or provide other evidence of 
  the submission date.
  
  ADDRESSES: The public can submit comments, hearing requests, and other 
  material, identified by Docket No. OSHA-2018-0003, using any of the 
  following methods:
      Electronically: Submit comments and attachments, as well as hearing 
  requests and other information, electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Follow 
  the instructions online for submitting comments. Note that this docket 
  may include several different Federal Register notices involving active 
  rulemakings, so it is extremely important to select the correct notice 
  or its ID number when submitting comments for this rulemaking. After 
  accessing ``all documents and comments'' in the docket (OSHA-2018-
  0003), check the ``Rule'' box in the column headed ``Document Type,'' 
  find the document posted on the date of publication of this document, 
  and click the ``Submit a Comment'' link. Additional instructions for 
  submitting comments are available from the http://www.regulations.gov 
  homepage.
      Facsimile: OSHA allows facsimile transmission of comments that are 
  10 pages or fewer in length (including attachments). Fax these 
  documents to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-1648. OSHA does not 
  require hard copies of these documents. Instead of transmitting 
  facsimile copies of attachments that supplement these documents (e.g., 
  studies, journal articles), commenters must submit these attachments to 
  the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2018-0003, Occupational Safety 
  and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3653, 200 
  Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. These attachments must 
  clearly identify the sender's name, the date, the subject, and the 
  docket number (OSHA-2018-0003) so that the Docket Office can attach 
  them to the appropriate document.
      Regular mail, express delivery, hand delivery, and messenger 
  (courier) service: Submit comments and any additional material to the 
  OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2018-0003, Occupational Safety and 
  Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3653, 200 
  Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-
  2350. (OSHA's TTY number is (877) 889-5627.) Contact the OSHA Docket 
  Office for information about security procedures concerning delivery of 
  materials by express delivery, hand delivery, and messenger service. 
  The Docket Office will accept deliveries (express delivery, hand 
  delivery, messenger service) during the Docket Office's normal business 
  hours, 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., ET.
      Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency's name, the 
  title of the rulemaking (Beryllium Standard: Direct Final Rule), and 
  the docket number (OSHA-2018-0003). OSHA will place comments and other 
  material, including any personal information, in the public docket 
  without revision, and the comments and other material will be available 
  online at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions 
  commenters about submitting statements they do not want made available 
  to the public, or submitting comments that contain personal

  
  information (either about themselves or others), such as Social 
  Security Numbers, birth dates, and medical data.
      Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the 
  docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the OSHA Docket Office 
  at the above address. The electronic docket for this direct final rule 
  established at http://www.regulations.gov contains most of the 
  documents in the docket. However, some information (e.g., copyrighted 
  material) is not available publicly to read or download through this 
  website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available 
  for inspection at the OSHA Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket 
  Office for assistance in locating docket submissions.
  
  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Press inquiries: Mr. Frank Meilinger, 
  OSHA Office of Communications, Occupational Safety and Health 
  Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3647, 200 Constitution 
  Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-1999; email: 
  meilinger.francis2@dol.gov.
      General information and technical inquiries: William Perry or 
  Maureen Ruskin, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Occupational 
  Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-
  3718, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 
  693-1950.
  
  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
  
  Table of Contents
  
  I. Background
  II. Consideration of Comments
  III. Direct Final Rulemaking
  IV. Discussion of Changes
  V. Legal Considerations
  VI. Final Economic Analysis and Regulatory Flexibility Act 
  Certification
  VII. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review Under the 
  Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
  VIII. Federalism
  IX. State Plan States
  X. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
  
  I. Background
  
      On January 9, 2017, OSHA published its final rule Occupational 
  Exposure to Beryllium and Beryllium Compounds in the Federal Register 
  (82 FR 2470). OSHA concluded that employees exposed to beryllium and 
  beryllium compounds at the preceding permissible exposure limits (PELs) 
  were at significant risk of material impairment of health, specifically 
  chronic beryllium disease and lung cancer. OSHA concluded that the new 
  8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) PEL of 0.2 [micro]g/m\3\ reduced 
  this significant risk to the maximum extent feasible. Based on 
  information submitted to the record, in the final rule OSHA issued 
  three separate standards--general industry, shipyards, and 
  construction. In addition to the revised PEL, the final rule 
  established a new short-term exposure limit (STEL) of 2.0 [micro]g/m\3\ 
  over a 15-minute sampling period and an action level of 0.1 [micro]g/
  m\3\ as an 8-hour TWA, along with a number of ancillary provisions 
  intended to provide additional protections to employees, such as 
  requirements for exposure assessment, methods for controlling exposure, 
  respiratory protection, personal protective clothing and equipment, 
  housekeeping, medical surveillance, hazard communication, and 
  recordkeeping similar to those found in other OSHA health standards.
      This DFR amends the text of the beryllium standard for general 
  industry to clarify OSHA's intent with respect to certain terms in the 
  standard, including the definition of Beryllium Work Area (BWA), the 
  definition of emergency, and the meaning of the terms dermal contact 
  and beryllium contamination. It also clarifies OSHA's intent with 
  respect to provisions for disposal and recycling and with respect to 
  provisions that the Agency intends to apply only where skin can be 
  exposed to materials containing at least 0.1% beryllium by weight.
      This direct final rule is expected to be an Executive Order (E.O.) 
  13771 deregulatory action. Details on OSHA's cost/cost savings 
  estimates for this direct final rule can be found in the rule's 
  economic analysis. OSHA has estimated that, at a 3 percent discount 
  rate over 10 years, there are net annual cost savings of $0.36 million 
  per year for this direct final rule; at a discount rate of 7 percent, 
  there are net annual cost savings of $0.37 million per year. When the 
  Department uses a perpetual time horizon, the annualized cost savings 
  of the direct final rule is $0.37 million with 7 percent discounting. 
  While the 2017 Beryllium Final Rule went into effect on May 20, 2017, 
  compliance obligations do not begin until May 11, 2018.
  
  II. Consideration of Comments
  
      OSHA will consider comments on all issues related to this action 
  including economic or other regulatory impacts of this action on the 
  regulated community. If OSHA receives no significant adverse comment, 
  OSHA will publish a Federal Register document confirming the effective 
  date of this DFR and withdrawing the companion Notice of Proposed 
  Rulemaking (NPRM). Such confirmation may include minor stylistic or 
  technical changes to the document. For the purpose of judicial review, 
  OSHA views the date of confirmation of the effective date of this DFR 
  as the date of promulgation.
  
  III. Direct Final Rulemaking
  
      In direct final rulemaking, an agency publishes a DFR in the 
  Federal Register, with a statement that the rule will go into effect 
  unless the agency receives significant adverse comment within a 
  specified period. The agency may publish an identical concurrent NPRM. 
  If the agency receives no significant adverse comment in response to 
  the DFR, the rule goes into effect. OSHA typically confirms the 
  effective date of a DFR through a separate Federal Register document. 
  If the agency receives a significant adverse comment, the agency 
  withdraws the DFR and treats such comment as a response to the NPRM. An 
  agency typically uses direct final rulemaking when an agency 
  anticipates that a rule will not be controversial.
      For purposes of this DFR, a significant adverse comment is one that 
  explains why the amendments to OSHA's beryllium standard would be 
  inappropriate. In determining whether a comment necessitates withdrawal 
  of the DFR, OSHA will consider whether the comment raises an issue 
  serious enough to warrant a substantive response in a notice-and-
  comment process. OSHA will not consider a comment recommending an 
  additional amendment to this rule to be a significant adverse comment 
  unless the comment states why the DFR would be ineffective without the 
  addition.
      In addition to publishing this DFR, OSHA is publishing a companion 
  NPRM in the Federal Register. The comment period for the NPRM runs 
  concurrently with that of the DFR. OSHA will treat comments received on 
  the companion NPRM as comments also regarding the DFR. Similarly, OSHA 
  will consider significant adverse comment submitted to the DFR as 
  comment to the companion NPRM. Therefore, if OSHA receives a 
  significant adverse comment on either this DFR or the NPRM, it will 
  withdraw this DFR and proceed with the companion NPRM. In the event 
  OSHA withdraws the DFR because of significant adverse comment, OSHA 
  will consider all timely comments received in response to the DFR when 
  it continues with the NPRM. After carefully considering all comments to 
  the DFR and the NPRM, OSHA will decide whether to publish a new final 
  rule.

  
      OSHA determined that the subject of this rulemaking is suitable for 
  direct final rulemaking. This amendment to the standard is clarifying 
  in nature and does not adversely impact the safety or health of 
  employees. The amended standard will clarify OSHA's intent regarding 
  certain terms in the standard, including the definition of Beryllium 
  Work Area (BWA), the definition of emergency, and the meaning of the 
  terms dermal contact and beryllium contamination. It will also clarify 
  OSHA's intent with respect to provisions for disposal and recycling and 
  with respect to provisions that the Agency intends to apply only where 
  skin can be exposed to materials containing at least 0.1% beryllium by 
  weight. The revisions do not impose any new costs or duties. For these 
  reasons, OSHA does not anticipate objections from the public to this 
  rulemaking action.
  
  IV. Discussion of Changes
  
      On January 9, 2017, OSHA adopted comprehensive standards addressing 
  exposure to beryllium and beryllium compounds in general industry, 
  construction, and shipyards. 82 FR 2470. Beryllium ``occurs naturally 
  in rocks, soil, coal, and volcanic dust,'' but can cause harm to 
  workers through exposure in the workplace. 80 FR 47579. OSHA has thus 
  set a general industry exposure limit for beryllium and beryllium 
  compounds since 1971, modified most recently in 2017. See 80 FR 47578-
  47579; 82 FR 2471. This DFR amends that 2017 general industry beryllium 
  standard (codified at 29 CFR 1910.1024) to clarify its applicability to 
  materials containing trace amounts of beryllium and to make related 
  changes. This DFR does not affect the construction and shipyard 
  standards, which are being addressed in a separate rulemaking. See 82 
  FR 29182.
      During the last rulemaking, OSHA addressed the issue of trace 
  amounts of beryllium. In its notice of proposed rulemaking, OSHA 
  proposed to exempt from its beryllium standard materials containing 
  less than 0.1% beryllium by weight on the premise that workers in 
  exempted industries are not exposed at levels of concern, 80 FR 47775, 
  but noted evidence of high airborne exposures in some of those 
  industries, in particular the primary aluminum production and coal-
  fired power generation industries. 80 FR 47776. Therefore, OSHA 
  proposed for comment several regulatory alternatives, including an 
  alternative that would ``expand the scope of the proposed standard to 
  also include all operations in general industry where beryllium exists 
  only as a trace contaminant.'' 80 FR 47730. After receiving comment, 
  OSHA adopted in the final rule an alternative limiting the exemption 
  for materials containing less than 0.1% beryllium by weight to where 
  the employer has objective data demonstrating that employee exposure to 
  airborne beryllium will remain below the action level (AL) of 0.1 
  [micro]g/m\3\, measured as an 8-hour TWA, under any foreseeable 
  conditions. 29 CFR 1910.1024(a)(2). In doing so, OSHA noted that the AL 
  exception ensured that workers with airborne exposures of concern were 
  covered by the standard:
  
      OSHA agrees with the many commenters and testimony expressing 
  concern that materials containing trace amounts of beryllium (less 
  than 0.1 percent by weight) can result in hazardous [airborne] 
  exposures to beryllium. We disagree, however, with those who 
  supported completely eliminating the exemption because this could 
  have unintended consequences of expanding the scope to cover minute 
  amounts of naturally occurring beryllium (Ex 1756 Tr. 55). Instead, 
  we believe that alternative #1b--essentially as proposed by Materion 
  and USW [United Steelworkers] and acknowledging that workers can 
  have significant [airborne] beryllium exposures even with materials 
  containing less than 0.1%--is the most appropriate approach. 
  Therefore, in the final standard, it is exempting from the 
  standard's application materials containing less than 0.1% beryllium 
  by weight only where the employer has objective data demonstrating 
  that employee [airborne] exposure to beryllium will remain below the 
  action level as an 8-hour TWA under any foreseeable conditions. 82 
  FR 2643.
  
      As the regulatory history makes clear, OSHA intended to protect 
  employees working with trace beryllium only when it caused airborne 
  exposures of concern. OSHA did not intend for provisions aimed at 
  protecting workers from the effects of dermal contact to apply in the 
  case of materials containing only trace amounts of beryllium. Since the 
  publication of the final rule, however, stakeholders have suggested 
  that an unintended consequence of the final rule's revision of the 
  trace exemption is that provisions designed to protect workers from 
  dermal contact with beryllium-contaminated material could be read as 
  applying to materials with only trace amounts of beryllium.
      This DFR adjusts the regulatory text of the general industry 
  beryllium standard to clarify that OSHA does not intend for 
  requirements that primarily address dermal contact to apply in 
  processes, operations, or areas involving only materials containing 
  less than 0.1% beryllium by weight. These clarifications are made 
  through changes to the definition of beryllium work area; the addition 
  of definitions of dermal contact, beryllium-contaminated, and 
  contaminated with beryllium; clarifications of certain hygiene 
  provisions with respect to beryllium contamination; and the 
  clarifications to provisions for disposal and recycling. In addition, 
  because under these changes it is possible to have a regulated area 
  that is not a beryllium work area, this DFR makes changes to certain 
  housekeeping provisions to ensure they apply in all regulated areas. 
  Finally, this DFR also includes a change to the definition of 
  ``emergency'', adding detail to the definition so as to clarify the 
  nature of the circumstances OSHA intends to be considered an emergency 
  for the purposes of the standard.
      Definition of beryllium work area. Paragraph (b) of the beryllium 
  standard published in January 2017 defined a beryllium work area as any 
  work area containing a process or operation that can release beryllium 
  where employees are, or can reasonably be expected to be, exposed to 
  airborne beryllium at any level or where there is the potential for 
  dermal contact with beryllium. This DFR amends the definition as 
  follows: ``Beryllium work area means any work area: (1) Containing a 
  process or operation that can release beryllium and that involves 
  materials that contain at least 0.1% beryllium by weight; and (2) where 
  employees are, or can reasonably be expected to be, exposed to airborne 
  beryllium at any level or where there is the potential for dermal 
  contact with beryllium.'' This change clarifies OSHA's intent that many 
  of the provisions associated with beryllium work areas should only 
  apply to areas where there are processes or operations involving 
  materials at least 0.1% beryllium by weight.
      Specifically, this change to the beryllium work area definition 
  clarifies OSHA's intent that the following provisions associated with 
  beryllium work areas do not apply where processes and operations 
  involve only materials containing trace amounts of beryllium (less than 
  0.1% beryllium by weight): Establishing and demarcating beryllium work 
  areas (paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and (e)(2)(i)); including procedures for 
  minimizing cross-contamination within (paragraph (f)(1)(i)(D)) or 
  minimizing migration of beryllium out of (paragraph (f)(1)(i)(F)) such 
  areas in the written exposure control plan; ensuring that at least one 
  engineering or process control is in place to reduce beryllium exposure 
  where airborne beryllium levels meet or exceed the AL (revised 
  paragraph

  
  (f)(2)(ii)).\1\ Additionally, for areas where beryllium is only present 
  in materials at concentrations of less than 0.1% beryllium by weight, 
  unless that area is also a regulated area, employers are not required 
  to ensure that all surfaces in such areas are as free as practicable of 
  beryllium (paragraph (j)(1)(i)); ensure that all surfaces in such areas 
  are cleaned by HEPA-filtered vacuuming or other methods that minimize 
  the likelihood and level of airborne exposure (paragraph (j)(2)(i)); or 
  prohibit dry sweeping or brushing for cleaning surfaces in such areas 
  (paragraph (j)(2)(ii)).
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \1\ As explained in the preamble to the January 2017 rule, in 
  industries that process or handle materials with only trace amounts 
  of beryllium and that encounter exposures to beryllium above the 
  action level, the PEL would ``be exceeded only during operations 
  that generate [an] excessive amount of visible airborne dust.'' 82 
  FR 2583. OSHA therefore expects that if exposures in such a facility 
  are below the PEL but above the AL, there is already at least one 
  engineering or process control in place, so this requirement had no 
  effect on primary aluminum production or coal-fired utilities. The 
  2017 FEA explained that this provision would only require additional 
  controls in two job categories in two application groups, neither of 
  which are in primary aluminum production or coal-fired utilities. 
  (Document ID OSHA-H005C-2006-0870-2042, p. V-12).
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      This DFR also includes conforming changes to maintain the January 
  2017 rule's requirements for housekeeping in regulated areas. Because 
  all regulated areas were also beryllium work areas under the January 
  2017 beryllium standard, OSHA did not specify whether requirements for 
  beryllium work areas should also apply in regulated areas (areas in 
  which airborne beryllium exposure meets or exceeds the TWA PEL or 
  STEL). This DFR's clarification to the definition of beryllium work 
  area, however, means that it is possible for a work area to be a 
  regulated area, but not a beryllium work area. This would occur when 
  processes that involve only materials containing less than 0.1% 
  beryllium by weight nevertheless create airborne beryllium exposures at 
  or above the TWA PEL or STEL. 82 FR 2583. It is thus important to 
  clarify that housekeeping (paragraph (j)) requirements continue to 
  apply in regulated areas, even if the processes or operations in these 
  areas involve materials with only trace beryllium. Operations or 
  processes involving trace beryllium materials must generate extremely 
  high dust levels in order to exceed the TWA PEL or STEL. Following the 
  housekeeping methods required by paragraph (j) will help to protect 
  workers against resuspension of surface beryllium accumulations from 
  extremely dusty operations and limit workers' airborne exposure to 
  beryllium.
      The DFR accordingly amends paragraphs (j)(1)(i), (j)(2)(i), and 
  (j)(2)(ii) to state explicitly that they apply to regulated areas, as 
  follows. Paragraph (j)(1)(i), as amended, states that ``[t]he employer 
  must maintain all surfaces in beryllium work areas and regulated areas 
  as free as practicable of beryllium and in accordance with the written 
  exposure control plan required under paragraph (f)(1) and the cleaning 
  methods required under paragraph (j)(2) of this standard.'' Paragraph 
  (j)(2)(i), as amended, states that ``[t]he employer must ensure that 
  surfaces in beryllium work areas and regulated areas are cleaned by 
  HEPA-filtered vacuuming or other methods that minimize the likelihood 
  and level of airborne exposure.'' Paragraph (j)(2)(ii), as amended, 
  states that ``[t]he employer must not allow dry sweeping or brushing 
  for cleaning surfaces in beryllium work areas or regulated areas unless 
  HEPA-filtered vacuuming or other methods that minimize the likelihood 
  and level of airborne exposure are not safe or effective.''
      This DFR also makes conforming changes to the engineering controls 
  requirements to ensure that the hierarchy of controls continues to 
  apply in all regulated areas. Paragraph (f)(2) of the January 2017 
  beryllium standard provided that, if airborne exposures still exceed 
  the PEL or STEL after implementing at least one control for each 
  operation in a beryllium work area that releases airborne beryllium, 
  the employer must implement additional or enhanced engineering and work 
  practice controls to reduce airborne exposure to or below the limit 
  exceeded. OSHA intended this provision to apply to all operations 
  within the scope of the standard that can release airborne beryllium. 
  82 FR 2671-72. Because, under this DFR's revisions, not all regulated 
  areas will be beryllium work areas, this DFR rearranges the regulatory 
  text of paragraph (f)(2) to make clear that the hierarchy of controls 
  will continue to apply in regulated areas that are not beryllium work 
  areas.
      Definitions related to beryllium contamination. To further clarify 
  OSHA's intent that the standard's requirements aimed at reducing the 
  effect of dermal contact with beryllium should not apply to areas where 
  there are no processes or operations involving materials containing at 
  least 0.1% beryllium by weight, this DFR defines ``beryllium-
  contaminated or contaminated with beryllium'' and adds those terms to 
  certain provisions in the standard. The DFR defines those terms as 
  follows: ``Contaminated with beryllium and beryllium-contaminated mean 
  contaminated with dust, fumes, mists, or solutions containing beryllium 
  in concentrations greater than or equal to 0.1 percent by weight.'' The 
  DFR adds the terms to certain provisions in the standard's requirements 
  for hygiene areas and disposal and recycling.
      The use of this definition accordingly clarifies OSHA's intent that 
  the following provisions, which apply where clothing, hair, skin, or 
  work surfaces are beryllium-contaminated, do not apply where the 
  contaminating material contains less than 0.1% beryllium by weight: 
  Paragraph (h)(2)(i) and paragraph (h)(2)(ii), which require the 
  employer to ensure that each employee removes all beryllium-
  contaminated personal protective clothing and equipment at the 
  appropriate time and as specified in the written exposure control plan 
  required by paragraph (f)(1); and paragraph (h)(2)(iii) and paragraph 
  (h)(2)(iv), which require the employer to ensure that measures to 
  prevent cross contamination between beryllium-contaminated personal 
  protective clothing and equipment and street clothing are observed and 
  that beryllium-contaminated personal protective clothing and equipment 
  are not removed from the workplace. This DFR also amends paragraph 
  (h)(3)(ii), which requires the employer to ensure that beryllium is 
  properly removed from PPE, by adding the term ``beryllium-
  contaminated'' so that this requirement applies only where the 
  contaminating material contains at least 0.1% beryllium by weight. The 
  amended paragraph (h)(3)(ii) reads as follows: ``The employer must 
  ensure that beryllium is not removed from beryllium-contaminated 
  personal protective clothing and equipment by blowing, shaking, or any 
  other means that disperses beryllium into the air.''
      Similarly, the DFR's inclusion of the term ``contaminated with 
  beryllium'' in paragraphs (i)(3)(i)(B) and (i)(3)(ii)(B) clarifies 
  OSHA's intent that those provisions, which require employers to provide 
  and ensure use of showers where employees' hair or body parts other 
  than hands, face, and neck can reasonably be expected to become 
  contaminated with beryllium, do not apply where the contaminating 
  material contains less than 0.1% beryllium by weight.
      The DFR's adoption of the definition of ``beryllium-contaminated'' 
  further clarifies the application of certain requirements that are 
  meant to minimize re-entrainment of airborne beryllium and reduce the 
  effect of

  
  dermal contact with beryllium. Specifically, it clarifies that 
  paragraph (j)(2)(iii), which prohibits the use of compressed air for 
  cleaning beryllium-contaminated surfaces except where used in 
  conjunction with an appropriate ventilation system, and paragraph 
  (j)(2)(iv), which requires the use of respiratory protection and PPE in 
  accordance with paragraphs (g) and (h) of the standard when dry 
  sweeping, brushing, or compressed air are used to clean beryllium-
  contaminated surfaces, do not apply where the contaminating material 
  contains less than 0.1% beryllium by weight. OSHA does not expect the 
  additional airborne exposure from dry brushing, sweeping, or using 
  compressed air to significantly increase the levels of airborne 
  exposure outside regulated areas when working with trace beryllium. 
  This is because for trace beryllium to generate airborne exposures of 
  concern, excessive amounts of dust would need to be generated, and this 
  would not happen outside of regulated areas.
      This DFR also adds the term ``beryllium-contaminated'' to certain 
  requirements pertaining to eating and drinking areas to clarify that 
  hygiene requirements in these areas apply only where materials 
  containing more than 0.1% beryllium by weight may contaminate such 
  areas. Paragraph (i)(4)(i), as amended by this DFR, states that 
  wherever the employer allows employees to consume food or beverages at 
  a worksite where beryllium is present, the employer must ensure that 
  ``[b]eryllium-contaminated surfaces in eating and drinking areas are as 
  free as practicable of beryllium.'' Paragraph (i)(4)(ii), as amended by 
  this DFR, requires employers to ensure that ``[n]o employees enter any 
  eating or drinking area with beryllium-contaminated personal protective 
  clothing or equipment unless, prior to entry, surface beryllium has 
  been removed from the clothing or equipment by methods that do not 
  disperse beryllium into the air or onto an employee's body.''
      Definition of dermal contact with beryllium. To clarify OSHA's 
  intent that requirements of the standard associated with dermal contact 
  with beryllium should not apply to areas where there are no processes 
  or operations involving materials at least 0.1% beryllium by weight, 
  this DFR also adds a definition for dermal contact with beryllium. This 
  new definition provides, ``Dermal contact with beryllium means skin 
  exposure to: (1) Soluble beryllium compounds containing beryllium in 
  concentrations greater than or equal to 0.1 percent by weight; (2) 
  solutions containing beryllium in concentrations greater than or equal 
  to 0.1 percent by weight; or (3) dust, fumes, or mists containing 
  beryllium in concentrations greater than or equal to 0.1 percent by 
  weight.'' Accordingly, the definition clarifies that paragraph 
  (h)(1)(ii), which requires an employer to provide and ensure the use of 
  personal protective clothing and equipment where there is a reasonable 
  expectation of dermal contact with beryllium, applies only where 
  contact may occur with materials containing at least 0.1% beryllium by 
  weight. This definition also clarifies that the requirements related to 
  dermal contact in the written exposure control plan, washing 
  facilities, medical examinations, and training provisions only apply 
  where contact may occur with materials containing at least 0.1% 
  beryllium by weight.
      Definition of emergency. This DFR also clarifies the definition of 
  ``emergency'' in paragraph (b) of the beryllium standard published in 
  January 2017. That paragraph defined an emergency as ``any uncontrolled 
  release of airborne beryllium.'' This DFR amends the definition as 
  follows: ``Emergency means any occurrence such as, but not limited to, 
  equipment failure, rupture of containers, or failure of control 
  equipment, which may or does result in an uncontrolled and unintended 
  release of airborne beryllium that presents a significant hazard.'' 
  This change clarifies the circumstances under which the provisions 
  associated with emergencies should apply, including the requirements 
  that employers provide and ensure employee use of respirators and that 
  employers provide medical surveillance to employees exposed in an 
  emergency. This change is consistent with OSHA's intent as explained in 
  the preamble to the 2017 final rule. 82 FR 2690 (``An emergency could 
  result from equipment failure, rupture of containers, or failure of 
  control equipment, among other causes.''). These examples show OSHA's 
  intent to define an ``emergency'' as something unintended as well as 
  uncontrolled, and including the examples in the new definition make 
  that clear. It is also consistent with other OSHA standards, such as 
  methylenedianiline (1910.1050), vinyl chloride (1910.1017), 
  acrylonitrile (1910.1045), benzene (1910.1028), and ethylene oxide 
  (1910.1047).
      Disposal and recycling. Finally, this DFR clarifies the application 
  of the disposal and recycling provisions. Paragraph (j)(3) of the 
  beryllium standard published in January 2017 required employers to 
  ensure that materials designated for disposal that contain or are 
  contaminated with beryllium are disposed of in sealed, impermeable 
  enclosures, such as bags or containers, that are labeled in accordance 
  with paragraph (m)(3) of the standard. It also required that materials 
  designated for recycling which contain or are contaminated with 
  beryllium are cleaned to be as free as practicable of surface beryllium 
  contamination and labeled in accordance with paragraph (m)(3) of the 
  standard, or placed in sealed, impermeable enclosures, such as bags or 
  containers, that are labeled in accordance with paragraph (m)(3) of the 
  standard. These provisions were designed to protect workers from dermal 
  contact with beryllium dust generated during processing, where there is 
  a risk of beryllium sensitization. See 82 FR 2694, 2695. This DFR 
  accordingly limits those requirements to ``materials that contain 
  beryllium in concentrations of 0.1 percent by weight or more or are 
  contaminated with beryllium,'' consistent with OSHA's intention that 
  provisions aimed at protecting workers from the effects of dermal 
  contact do not apply in the case of materials containing only trace 
  amounts of beryllium. The hazard communication standard continues to 
  apply according to its terms. See 29 CFR 1910.1200.
  
  V. Legal Considerations
  
      The purpose of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) 
  (``OSH Act''; 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) is ``to assure so far as possible 
  every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working 
  conditions and to preserve our human resources.'' 29 U.S.C. 651(b). To 
  achieve this goal, Congress authorized the Secretary of Labor to 
  promulgate and enforce occupational safety and health standards. 29 
  U.S.C. 655(b), 658. A safety or health standard is a standard that 
  ``requires conditions, or the adoption or use of one or more practices, 
  means, methods, operations, or processes, reasonably necessary or 
  appropriate to provide safe or healthful employment and places of 
  employment.'' 29 U.S.C. 652(8). A standard is reasonably necessary or 
  appropriate when a significant risk of material harm exists in the 
  workplace and the standard would substantially reduce or eliminate that 
  workplace risk. See Industrial Union Dept., AFL-CIO v. Am. Petroleum 
  Inst., 448 U.S. 607, 641-42 (1980) (plurality opinion).
      OSHA need not make additional findings on risk for this DFR. As 
  discussed above, this DFR will not diminish the employee protections 
  put into place by the standard being amended. And because OSHA 
  previously determined that the

  
  beryllium standard substantially reduces a significant risk (82 FR 
  2545-52), it is unnecessary for the Agency to make additional findings 
  on risk for the minor changes and clarifications being made to the 
  standard. See, e.g., Public Citizen Health Research Group v. Tyson, 796 
  F.2d 1479, 1502 n.16 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (rejecting the argument that OSHA 
  must ``find that each and every aspect of its standard eliminates a 
  significant risk'').
      OSHA has determined that these minor changes and clarifications are 
  technologically and economically feasible. All OSHA standards must be 
  both technologically and economically feasible. See United Steelworkers 
  v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189, 1264 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (``Lead I''). The 
  Supreme Court has defined feasibility as ``capable of being done.'' Am. 
  Textile Mfrs. Inst. v. Donovan, 452 U.S. 490, 509-10 (1981) (``Cotton 
  Dust''). Courts have further clarified that a standard is 
  technologically feasible if OSHA proves a reasonable possibility, 
  ``within the limits of the best available evidence . . . that the 
  typical firm will be able to develop and install engineering and work 
  practice controls that can meet the PEL in most of its operations.'' 
  Lead I, 647 F.2d at 1272. With respect to economic feasibility, courts 
  have held that ``a standard is feasible if it does not threaten massive 
  dislocation to or imperil the existence of the industry.'' Id. at 1265 
  (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In the final economic 
  analysis (FEA) for the 2017 beryllium rule, OSHA concluded that the 
  rule was economically and technologically feasible. OSHA has determined 
  that this DFR is also economically and technologically feasible, 
  because it does not impose any new requirements or costs.
  
  VI. Final Economic Analysis and Regulatory Flexibility Act 
  Certification
  
      Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
  U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 
  1532(a)) require that OSHA estimate the benefits, costs, and net 
  benefits of regulations, and analyze the impacts of certain rules that 
  OSHA promulgates. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying 
  both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and 
  promoting flexibility.
      This DFR is not an ``economically significant regulatory action'' 
  under Executive Order 12866, or a ``major rule'' under the 
  Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), and its impacts do not 
  trigger the analytical requirements of UMRA. Neither the benefits nor 
  the costs of this DFR would exceed $100 million in any given year. This 
  DFR would, however, result in a net cost savings for employers in 
  primary aluminum production and coal-fired utilities, which are the 
  only industries in General Industry covered by the 2017 Beryllium Final 
  Rule that OSHA identified with operations involving materials 
  containing only trace beryllium (less than 0.1% beryllium by weight).
      Several calculations illustrate the expected cost savings. At a 
  discount rate of 3 percent, this DFR would yield annualized cost 
  savings of $0.36 million per year for 10 years. At a discount rate of 7 
  percent, this DFR would yield an annualized cost savings of $0.37 
  million per year for 10 years. These net cost savings amount to 
  approximately 0.6 percent of the original estimated cost of the 2017 
  Beryllium Final Rule for General Industry at discount rates of either 3 
  or 7 percent; to approximately 5.3 percent of the original estimated 
  cost of the 2017 Beryllium Final Rule for primary aluminum production 
  and coal-fired utilities only at a discount rate of 3 percent and 5.2 
  percent of the original estimated cost of the 2017 Beryllium Final Rule 
  for primary aluminum production and coal-fired utilities only at a 
  discount rate of 7 percent.\2\ Under a perpetual time horizon, the 
  annualized cost savings of this DFR is $0.37 million at a discount rate 
  of 7 percent.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \2\ The original estimated cost of the 2017 beryllium final rule 
  for General Industry, and separately for primary aluminum production 
  and coal-fired utilities, was updated to 2017 dollars and 
  additionally adjusted and corrected, as subsequently explained in 
  the text.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  1. Changes to the Baseline: Updating to 2017 Dollars and Removing 
  Familiarization Costs
  
      Because baseline costs typically reflect the costs of compliance 
  without the changes set forth in an agency's action--in this case, the 
  DFR--OSHA has revised the baseline costs, as displayed in the FEA in 
  support of the beryllium standard of January 9, 2017, in two ways. 
  First, OSHA updated the projected costs for general industry contained 
  in the FEA that accompanied the rule from 2015 to 2017 dollars, using 
  the latest Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) wage data (for 
  2016) and inflating them to 2017 dollars. Second, OSHA excluded certain 
  familiarization costs, included in the cost estimates developed in the 
  beryllium FEA for the 2017 Beryllium Final Rule, because OSHA expects 
  that those costs have already been incurred by affected employers. 
  Thus, the baseline costs for this FEA are the projected costs from the 
  2017 FEA, updated to 2017 dollars, less familiarization costs in the 
  2017 beryllium final rule (but including some new familiarization costs 
  for employers to become familiar with the revised provisions). 
  Throughout this analysis of costs and cost savings, the context is 
  limited to employers in primary aluminum production and coal-fired 
  utilities.
  
  2. Discussion of Overhead Costs
  
      As in the 2017 FEA, OSHA has not accounted for overhead labor costs 
  in its analysis of the cost savings for this DFR due to concerns about 
  consistency. There are several ways to look at the cost elements that 
  fit the definition of overhead, and there is a range of overhead 
  estimates currently used within the federal government--for example, 
  the Environmental Protection Agency has used 17 percent,\3\ and 
  government contractors have been reported to use an average of 77 
  percent.\4\ Some overhead costs, such as advertising and marketing, may 
  be more closely correlated with output than with labor. Other overhead 
  costs vary with the number of new employees. For example, rent or 
  payroll processing costs may change little with the addition of 1 
  employee in a 500-employee firm, but may change substantially with the 
  addition of 100 employees. If an employer is able to rearrange current 
  employees' duties to implement a rule, then the marginal share of 
  overhead costs, such as rent, insurance, and major office equipment 
  (e.g., computers, printers, copiers) would be very difficult to measure 
  with accuracy.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \3\ See Grant Thornton LLP. 2015 Government Contractor Survey 
  (Document ID OSHA-H005C-2006-0870-2153). The application of this 
  overhead rate was based on an approach used by the Environmental 
  Protection Agency, as described in EPA's ``Wage Rates for Economic 
  Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program,'' June 10, 2002. 
  This analysis itself was based on a survey of several large chemical 
  manufacturing plants: Heiden Associates, Final Report: A Study of 
  Industry Compliance Costs Under the Final Comprehensive Assessment 
  Information Rule, Prepared for the Chemical Manufacturers 
  Association, December 14, 1989.
      \4\ For further examples of overhead cost estimates, please see 
  the Employee Benefits Security Administration's guidance at https://www.dol.gov/sites/default/files/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/rules-and-regulations/technical-appendices/labor-cost-inputs-used-in-ebsa-opr-ria-and-pra-burden-calculations-august-2016.pdf.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      If OSHA had included an overhead rate when estimating the marginal 
  cost of labor, without further analyzing an appropriate quantitative 
  adjustment, and adopted for these purposes an overhead rate of 17 
  percent on base wages, the cost savings of this DFR

  
  would increase to approximately $0.39 million per year, at discount 
  rates of either 3 percent or 7 percent.\5\ The addition of 17 percent 
  overhead on base wages would therefore increase cost savings by 
  approximately 7 percent above the primary estimate at either discount 
  rate.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \5\ OSHA used an overhead rate of 17 percent on base wages in a 
  sensitivity analysis in the FEA (OSHA-2010-0034-4247, p. VII-65) in 
  support of the March 25, 2016 final respirable crystalline silica 
  standards (81 FR 16286) and in the PEA in support of the June 27, 
  2017 proposed beryllium standards in construction and shipyard 
  sectors (82 FR 29201).
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  3. Cost Impact of the Changes to the Standard
  
      OSHA estimates a net cost savings from this DFR for employers at 
  primary aluminum production and coal-fired utilities, which again are 
  the only two industries identified in the 2017 FEA as having costs 
  associated with exposure to trace beryllium materials.\6\ Annualizing 
  the present value of net cost savings over ten years, the result is an 
  annualized net cost savings of $0.36 million per year at a discount 
  rate of 3 percent, or $0.37 million per year at a discount rate of 7 
  percent. When the Department uses a perpetual time horizon, the 
  annualized net cost savings of this DFR is $0.37 million at a discount 
  rate of 7 percent.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \6\ As noted in Section IV of this preamble, coverage of dermal 
  contact with trace beryllium materials was an unintended consequence 
  of OSHA's decision to cover airborne exposures to beryllium above 
  the action level caused by operations that generate excessive 
  amounts of dust from trace beryllium materials. Likewise, in the 
  2017 FEA supporting OSHA's Beryllium Final Rule, through an 
  oversight, OSHA made no distinction between trace and non-trace 
  beryllium materials when determining the cost of requirements 
  triggered by dermal contact with beryllium. The cost savings 
  generated by this FEA are a result of correcting these oversights.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      The undiscounted cost savings by provision and year are presented 
  below in Table 1, and the cost savings by provision and discount rate 
  are shown below in Tables 2 and 3. As described elsewhere in this 
  document, the cost savings described in this FEA reflect savings only 
  for provisions covered by the changes in this DFR as well as added 
  familiarization costs. OSHA estimated no cost savings for the PEL, 
  respiratory protection, exposure assessment, regulated areas, medical 
  surveillance, medical removal protection, written exposure control 
  plan, or training provisions because the DFR makes no changes of 
  substance to those provisions.
      a. Beryllium work areas. OSHA is limiting the definition of 
  ``beryllium work area'' to any work area containing a process or 
  operation ``that involves materials that contain at least 0.1% 
  beryllium by weight. . . .'' OSHA has determined that affected 
  establishments in primary aluminum production and coal-fired utilities 
  would thus no longer need to designate and demarcate beryllium work 
  areas because their materials would not meet that threshold outside of 
  the ``regulated areas'' in primary aluminum production where employee 
  exposures to airborne beryllium would exceed the PEL. In its previous 
  economic analysis, OSHA had estimated that each of the establishments 
  in these categories required beryllium work areas in addition to 
  ``regulated areas,'' which were costed separately. The removal of these 
  beryllium work area designations results in an annualized cost savings 
  of $12,913 using a 3 percent discount rate and $15,682 using a 7 
  percent discount rate. Annualized costs by provision and discount rate 
  can be seen below in Tables 2 and 3.
      b. Protective work clothing and equipment. OSHA is recognizing no 
  cost savings in this DFR for the elimination of PPE requirements 
  associated with dermal contact in coal-fired utilities. In its 2017 
  FEA, OSHA listed the PPE compliance rate for utility workers at coal-
  fired utilities at 75 percent and therefore estimated PPE costs for the 
  residual 25 percent of utility workers in the industry (where airborne 
  exposures exceed the PEL or STEL or where there is dermal contact with 
  beryllium). But upon further review, OSHA has determined that it should 
  not have included those costs because affected employers in coal-fired 
  utilities were already required to wear PPE under 29 CFR 1910.1018(j) 
  to prevent skin and eye irritation from exposure to trace inorganic 
  arsenic found in coal ash. As OSHA noted in its technological 
  feasibility analysis, inorganic arsenic is often found in coal fly ash 
  in ``concentrations 10 to 1,000 times greater than beryllium,'' fly ash 
  is the primary source of beryllium exposure for employees in coal-fired 
  utilities, and employers in this application group indicated that they 
  were already following a majority of the provisions of the rule to 
  comply with OSHA requirements for other hazardous substances, such as 
  arsenic (p. IV-652). Thus, in all of the areas within a facility in 
  which employees are likely to be exposed to beryllium, they are also 
  likely to be exposed to concentrations of arsenic significantly high so 
  as to trigger the arsenic PPE requirements. Accordingly, coal-fired 
  utility compliance rates with the PPE requirement for affected workers 
  should have been 100 percent in the prior FEA, and no costs for PPE for 
  these workers should have been included in OSHA's cost estimates. 
  Because OSHA should not have included new beryllium PPE costs for this 
  group, OSHA is recognizing no cost savings in this DFR for the 
  elimination of PPE requirements associated with dermal contact in coal-
  fired utilities.
      There are, however, some small PPE cost savings for primary 
  aluminum production. The January 2017 rule requires employers to 
  provide PPE in two situations: (1) Where airborne exposure exceeds, or 
  can reasonably be expected to exceed, the TWA PEL or STEL; and (2) 
  where there is a reasonable expectation of dermal contact with 
  beryllium. 29 CFR 1910.1024(h)(1). It is the second of these two 
  situations which OSHA believes will trigger cost savings. Because this 
  DFR clarifies that ``dermal contact with beryllium'' does not include 
  contact with beryllium in concentrations less than 0.1% beryllium by 
  weight, gloves and other PPE requirements will be triggered by a 
  reasonable expectation of dermal contact only with materials containing 
  more than 0.1% beryllium by weight. In primary aluminum production, 
  there is no dermal contact with materials containing beryllium above 
  this threshold. As a result, the Agency has determined that in primary 
  aluminum production, additional PPE is only necessary for workers 
  exposed over the PEL. This change results in an annualized cost savings 
  for employers in primary aluminum production of $35,023 using a 3 or 7 
  percent discount rate. Annualized costs by provision and discount rate 
  can be seen below in Tables 2 and 3.
      c. Hygiene areas and practices. The DFR's adoption of a definition 
  for ``contaminated with beryllium'' also reduces the costs of complying 
  with the Hygiene Areas and Practices provision in primary aluminum 
  production (the costs for coal-fired utilities would not be affected). 
  The 2017 Final Beryllium Rule requires employers to provide showers 
  where both of two conditions are met:

  
  
      (A) Airborne exposure exceeds, or can reasonably be expected to 
  exceed, the TWA PEL or STEL; and
      (B) Beryllium can reasonably be expected to contaminate 
  employees' hair or body parts other than hands, face, and neck.
  
  29 CFR 1910.1024(i)(3)(i). By revising (B) to incorporate the newly 
  defined term ``contaminated with beryllium,'' the condition in 
  paragraph (B) will not be met in primary aluminum production because no 
  employees in this application group can reasonably be expected to 
  become ``contaminated with beryllium.'' Thus, the beryllium standard 
  does not require employers in this application group to provide 
  showers. Similarly, employers need not provide the estimated lower-cost 
  alternative of head coverings, discussed in the 2017 FEA.\7\ Removing 
  the cost of head coverings for workers in this application group 
  results in an annualized cost savings for employers in primary aluminum 
  production of $415 using a 3 or 7 percent discount rate. Annualized 
  costs by provision and discount rate can be seen below in Tables 2 and 
  3.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \7\ In the previous FEA, OSHA had included costs for head 
  coverings in lieu of showers, reasoning that employees could avoid 
  the need for showers because the head coverings and other PPE would 
  prevent their hair or body parts from becoming contaminated with 
  beryllium.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      d. Housekeeping. Similar to the above discussion about PPE in coal-
  fired utilities, OSHA is recognizing no cost savings in this DFR for 
  coal-fired utilities as a result of the modification of the 
  housekeeping requirements. In the FEA in support of the 2017 Beryllium 
  Final Rule, the Agency listed the housekeeping compliance rate for 
  affected workers at coal-fired utilities at 75 percent and therefore 
  estimated housekeeping costs for the residual 25 percent of utility 
  workers in a beryllium work area. But upon further review, OSHA has 
  determined that affected employers in coal-fired utilities were already 
  required to perform comparable housekeeping duties under 29 CFR 
  1910.1018(k) to prevent accumulations of inorganic arsenic found in 
  coal ash. Accordingly, coal-fired utility compliance rates with the 
  housekeeping requirements for affected workers should have been 100 
  percent in the prior FEA, and no costs for housekeeping for these 
  workers should have been included in OSHA's cost estimates. 
  Consequently, OSHA is recognizing no cost savings in this DFR for coal-
  fired utilities as a result of the modification of the housekeeping 
  requirements.
      The rule clarification also means that employers in primary 
  aluminum production facilities will typically only be required to 
  comply with the beryllium housekeeping provisions in ``regulated 
  areas,'' which for cost purposes OSHA identified as employees exposed 
  over the PEL in its exposure profile. There are several exceptions, 
  none of which have a quantifiable impact on costs: Employers in this 
  industry would still need to follow the housekeeping requirements when 
  cleaning up spills and emergency releases of beryllium (paragraph 
  (j)(1)(ii)), handling and maintaining cleaning equipment (paragraph 
  (j)(2)(v)), and when necessary to reduce some workers exposures below 
  the PEL (serving as an engineering control to prevent over-exposure to 
  beryllium within regulated areas or the need for regulated areas). OSHA 
  did not identify separate costs in its prior FEA for this use of 
  housekeeping as a form of engineering control and does not do so here. 
  Thus, for cost calculation purposes in this new FEA, OSHA removed 
  housekeeping costs for all employees exposed below the PEL in its 
  exposure profile. This change results in an annualized cost savings for 
  employers in primary aluminum production of $323,664 using a 3 percent 
  discount rate and $330,324 using a 7 percent discount rate. Annualized 
  costs by provision and discount rate can be seen below in Tables 2 and 
  3. OSHA believes that these estimated cost savings might be slightly 
  overstated to the extent that some housekeeping outside of the 
  regulated areas will still be needed to perform an engineering-control 
  function in some facilities, but the Agency is unable to quantify them 
  now because of the variability among facilities and controls that 
  employers may implement to comply with the standard.
      e. Additional familiarization. In the FEA in support of OSHA's 2017 
  Beryllium Final Rule, the Agency determined that employers would need 
  to spend time familiarizing themselves with the rule and allocated 4, 
  8, and 40 hours, depending on establishment size (fewer than 20 
  employees, between 20 and 499 employees, and 500 or more employees, 
  respectively). OSHA has similarly determined that establishments will 
  need to spend time familiarizing themselves with this DFR. As the 
  affected provisions in this DFR are only a fraction of all the 
  provisions in the 2017 final rule and would not require any new actions 
  on the part of employers, the Agency has estimated familiarization time 
  of 2, 4, and 20 hours per employer, depending on establishment size, 
  for a supervisor to review the changes to the beryllium rule reflected 
  in this DFR. This results in an annualized cost of $9,404 using a 3 
  percent discount rate and $11,421 using a 7 percent discount rate. 
  Annualized costs by provision and discount rate--3 and 7 percent--can 
  be seen below in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
      f. Unchanged provisions. As discussed earlier, this DFR primarily 
  serves to clarify OSHA's intent with respect to certain terms and 
  requirements in OSHA's 2017 beryllium general industry standard. These 
  changes largely deal with clarifying the application of various 
  requirements to trace beryllium. The triggers for most provisions in 
  the standard--the PEL, respiratory protection, exposure assessment, 
  regulated areas, medical surveillance, medical removal protection, 
  written exposure control plan, and training provisions \8\--are 
  determined by factors other than beryllium concentration and are 
  unchanged by this DFR. Similarly, the revised definition of 
  ``emergency'' in this DFR would not affect the costs estimated for the 
  other provisions in the standard.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \8\ While the changes in the standard do not mandate any 
  additional employee training, OSHA notes that it had previously 
  accounted for costs of annual re-training required by the standard 
  (Document ID OSHA-H005C-2006-0870-2042, p. V-221).
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  4. Economic and Technological Feasibility
  
      In the FEA for the 2017 beryllium standard, OSHA concluded that the 
  rule was economically and technologically feasible. This DFR does not 
  impose any new requirements and has the net impact of removing a small 
  amount of cost, so OSHA has determined that this final rule is also 
  economically and technologically feasible.

  
  5. Effects on Benefits
  
      This DFR clarifies aspects of the 2017 general industry beryllium 
  standard to address unintended consequences regarding the applicability 
  of provisions designed to protect workers from dermal contact with 
  beryllium-containing materials and trace amounts of beryllium. This DFR 
  makes clear that OSHA did not, and does not, intend to apply the 
  provisions aimed at protecting workers from the effects of dermal 
  contact to industries that only work with beryllium in trace amounts 
  where there is limited or no airborne exposure. In the prior FEA, OSHA 
  did not identify any quantifiable benefits from avoiding beryllium 
  sensitization from dermal contact (see discussion at p. VII-16 through 
  VII-18). Thus, the revisions in this DFR, which are focused on dermal 
  contact, do not have any impact on OSHA's previous benefit estimates.
  
  6. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
  
      This DFR will result in cost savings for affected small entities, 
  and those savings fall below levels that could be said to have a 
  significant positive economic impact on a substantial number of small 
  entities.\9\ Therefore, OSHA certifies that this direct final rule 
  would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
  entities.
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
      \9\ OSHA investigated whether the projected cost savings would 
  exceed 1 percent of revenues or 5 percent of profits for small 
  entities and very small entities for every industry. To determine if 
  this was the case, OSHA returned to its original regulatory 
  flexibility analysis (in the 2017 FEA) for small entities and very 
  small entities. OSHA found that the cost savings of this DFR are 
  such a small percentage of revenues and profits for every affected 
  industry that OSHA's criteria would not be exceeded for any 
  industry.

  
  
  
                                                        Table 1--Total Undiscounted Net Cost Savings of the Final Beryllium Standard by Year
                                                                                           [2017 Dollars]
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                 Year
          Application group        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           1               2               3               4               5               6               7               8               9              10
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Aluminum Production.............        $613,367        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053        $328,053
  Coal Fired Utilities............           9,461               0               0               0               0               0               0               0               0               0
                                   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.......................         622,828         328,053         328,053         328,053         328,053         328,053         328,053         328,053         328,053         328,053
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  
                     Table 2--Annualized Net Cost Savings of Program Requirements for Industries Affected by the Final Beryllium Standard by Sector and Six-Digit NAICS Industry
                                                                          [In 2017 dollars using a 3 percent discount rate]
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Written    Protective
  Application group/                        Rule        Exposure    Regulated   Beryllium      Medical      Medical    exposure       work       Hygiene                                  Total
        NAICS            Industry     familiarization  assessment     areas     work areas  surveillance    removal     control    clothing &   areas and   Housekeeping    Training     program
                                                                                                           provision     plan      equipment    practices                                 costs
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Aluminum Production
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  331313...........  Alumina                  -$240            $0          $0       $2,639           $0           $0          $0      $35,023         $415      $323,664           $0     $361,500
                      Refining and
                      Primary
                      Aluminum
                      Production.
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        Coal Fired Utilities
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  221112...........  Fossil Fuel             -6,209             0           0        8,087            0            0           0            0            0             0            0        1,878
                      Electric Power
                      Generation.
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  311221...........  Wet Corn                  -282             0           0          260            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -22
                      Milling.
  311313...........  Beet Sugar                -353             0           0          303            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -49
                      Manufacturing.
  311942...........  Spice and                  -41             0           0           43            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            2
                      Extract
                      Manufacturing.
  312120...........  Breweries......            -54             0           0           43            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -11
  321219...........  Reconstituted              -20             0           0           22            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            2
                      Wood Product
                      Manufacturing.
  322110...........  Pulp Mills.....            -32             0           0           22            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -10
  322121...........  Paper (except             -437             0           0          238            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -199
                      Newsprint)
                      Mills.
  322122...........  Newsprint Mills           -705             0           0          519            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -186
  322130...........  Paperboard                -447             0           0          346            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -101
                      Mills.
  325211...........  Plastics                   -85             0           0           87            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            2
                      Material and
                      Resin
                      Manufacturing.
  325611...........  Soap and Other             -23             0           0           22            0            0           0            0            0             0            0           -1
                      Detergent
                      Manufacturing.
  327310...........  Cement                     -39             0           0           43            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            4
                      Manufacturing.
  333111b..........  Farm Machinery             -24             0           0           22            0            0           0            0            0             0            0           -2
                      and Equipment
                      Manufacturing.
  336510b..........  Railroad                   -26             0           0           22            0            0           0            0            0             0            0           -4
                      Rolling Stock
                      Manufacturing.
  611310...........  Colleges,                 -387             0           0          195            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -193
                      Universities,
                      and
                      Professional
                      Schools.
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total:
    General          -9,404.........              0             0      12,913            0            0            0      35,023          415      323,664             0      362,610
     Industry
     Subtotal.
    Construction     0..............              0             0           0            0            0            0           0            0            0             0            0
     Subtotal.

  
   
    Maritime         0..............              0             0           0            0            0            0           0            0            0             0            0
     Subtotal.
      Total, All     -9,404.........              0             0      12,913            0            0            0      35,023          415      323,664             0      362,610
       Industries.
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  
                     Table 3--Annualized Net Cost Savings of Program Requirements for Industries Affected by the Final Beryllium Standard by Sector and Six-Digit NAICS Industry
                                                                          [In 2017 dollars using a 7 percent discount rate]
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Written    Protective
  Application Group/                        Rule        Exposure    Regulated   Beryllium      Medical      Medical    exposure       work       Hygiene                                  Total
        NAICS            Industry     familiarization  assessment     areas     work areas  surveillance    removal     control    clothing &   areas and   Housekeeping    Training     program
                                                                                                           provision     plan      equipment    practices                                 costs
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Aluminum Production
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  331313...........  Alumina                  -$291            $0          $0       $3,205           $0           $0          $0      $35,023         $415      $330,324           $0     $368,675
                      Refining and
                      Primary
                      Aluminum
                      Production.
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        Coal Fired Utilities
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  221112...........  Fossil Fuel             -7,541             0           0        9,822            0            0           0            0            0             0            0        2,281
                      Electric Power
                      Generation.
  311221...........  Wet Corn                  -342             0           0          315            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -27
                      Milling.
  311313...........  Beet Sugar                -428             0           0          368            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -60
                      Manufacturing.
  311942...........  Spice and                  -50             0           0           53            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            3
                      Extract
                      Manufacturing.
  312120...........  Breweries......            -66             0           0           53            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -13
  321219...........  Reconstituted              -24             0           0           26            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            3
                      Wood Product
                      Manufacturing.
  322110...........  Pulp Mills.....            -39             0           0           26            0            0           0            0            0             0            0          -12
  322121...........  Paper (except             -531             0           0          289            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -242
                      Newsprint)
                      Mills.
  322122...........  Newsprint Mills           -856             0           0          631            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -225
  322130...........  Paperboard                -543             0           0          421            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -123
                      Mills.
  325211...........  Plastics                  -103             0           0          105            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            2
                      Material and
                      Resin
                      Manufacturing.
  325611...........  Soap and Other             -28             0           0           26            0            0           0            0            0             0            0           -2
                      Detergent
                      Manufacturing.
  327310...........  Cement                     -48             0           0           53            0            0           0            0            0             0            0            5
                      Manufacturing.
  333111b..........  Farm Machinery             -29             0           0           26            0            0           0            0            0             0            0           -3
                      and Equipment
                      Manufacturing.
  336510b..........  Railroad                   -31             0           0           26            0            0           0            0            0             0            0           -5
                      Rolling Stock
                      Manufacturing.
  611310...........  Colleges,                 -471             0           0          237            0            0           0            0            0             0            0         -234
                      Universities,
                      and
                      Professional
                      Schools.
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total:
    General          -11,421........              0             0      15,682            0            0            0      35,023          415      330,324             0      370,022
     Industry
     Subtotal.

  
   
    Construction     0..............              0             0           0            0            0            0           0            0            0             0            0
     Subtotal.
    Maritime         0..............              0             0           0            0            0            0           0            0            0             0            0
     Subtotal.
      Total, All     -11,421........              0             0      15,682            0            0            0      35,023          415      330,324             0      370,022
       Industries.
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  
  VII. OMB Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
  
      This rule contains no information collection requirements subject 
  to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 44 
  U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and its implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 
  1320. The PRA defines a collection of information as the obtaining, 
  causing to be obtained, soliciting, or requiring the disclosure to 
  third parties or the public of facts or opinions by or for an agency 
  regardless of form or format. See 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A). While not 
  affected by this rulemaking, the Department has cleared information 
  collections related to occupational exposure to beryllium standards--
  general industry, 29 CFR 1910.1024; construction, 29 CFR 1926.1124; and 
  shipyards, 29 CFR 1915.1024--under control number 1218-0267. The 
  existing approved information collections are unchanged by this 
  rulemaking. The Department welcomes comments on this determination.
  
  VIII. Federalism
  
      OSHA reviewed this DFR in accordance with the Executive Order on 
  Federalism (E.O. 13132, 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), which requires 
  that Federal agencies, to the extent possible, refrain from limiting 
  State policy options, consult with States prior to taking any actions 
  that would restrict State policy options, and take such actions only 
  when clear constitutional and statutory authority exists and the 
  problem is national in scope. E.O. 13132 provides for preemption of 
  State law only with the expressed consent of Congress. Any such 
  preemption is to be limited to the extent possible.
      Under Section 18 of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq., Congress 
  expressly provides that States may adopt, with Federal approval, a plan 
  for the development and enforcement of occupational safety and health 
  standards; States that obtain Federal approval for such a plan are 
  referred to as ``State Plan States'' (29 U.S.C. 667). Occupational 
  safety and health standards developed by State Plan States must be at 
  least as effective in providing safe and healthful employment and 
  places of employment as the Federal standards. Subject to these 
  requirements, State Plan States are free to develop and enforce under 
  State law their own requirements for safety and health standards.
      This DFR complies with E.O. 13132. In States without OSHA approved 
  State Plans, Congress expressly provides for OSHA standards to preempt 
  State occupational safety and health standards in areas addressed by 
  the Federal standards. In these States, this DFR would limit State 
  policy options in the same manner as every standard promulgated by 
  OSHA. In States with OSHA approved State Plans, this rulemaking does 
  not significantly limit State policy options.
  
  IX. State Plan States
  
      When Federal OSHA promulgates a new standard or more stringent 
  amendment to an existing standard, the 28 States and U.S. Territories 
  with their own OSHA approved occupational safety and health plans 
  (``State Plan States'') must amend their standards to reflect the new 
  standard or amendment, or show OSHA why such action is unnecessary, 
  e.g., because an existing State standard covering this area is ``at 
  least as effective'' as the new Federal standard or amendment. 29 CFR 
  1953.5(a). The State standard must be at least as effective as the 
  final Federal rule, must be applicable to both the private and public 
  (State and local government employees) sectors, and must be completed 
  within six months of the promulgation date of the final Federal rule. 
  When OSHA promulgates a new standard or amendment that does not impose 
  additional or more stringent requirements than an existing standard, 
  State Plan States are not required to amend their standards, although 
  the Agency may encourage them to do so. The 28 States and U.S. 
  Territories with OSHA approved occupational safety and health plans 
  are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, 
  Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, 
  Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, 
  Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming; Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New 
  Jersey, New York, and the Virgin Islands have OSHA approved State Plans 
  that apply to State and local government employees only.
      This DFR clarifies requirements and addresses the unintended 
  consequences associated with provisions intended to address the effects 
  of dermal contact with beryllium as applied to trace beryllium. It 
  imposes no new requirements. Therefore, no new State standards would be 
  required beyond those already required by the promulgation of the 
  January 2017 beryllium standard for general industry. State-Plan States 
  may nonetheless choose to conform to these revisions.
  
  X. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
  
      OSHA reviewed this DFR according to the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
  Act of 1995 (``UMRA''; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) and Executive Order 12875 
  (58 FR 58093). As discussed above in Section VI (``Economic Analysis 
  and Regulatory Flexibility Certification'') of this preamble, the 
  Agency determined that this DFR does not impose significant additional 
  costs on any private- or public-sector entity. Accordingly, this DFR 
  does not require significant additional expenditures by either public 
  or private employers.
      As noted above under Section IX (``State-Plan States''), the 
  Agency's standards do not apply to State and local governments except 
  in States that have elected voluntarily to adopt a State Plan approved 
  by the Agency. Consequently, this DFR does not meet the definition of a 
  ``Federal intergovernmental mandate'' (see Section 421(5) of the UMRA 
  (2 U.S.C. 658(5))). Therefore, for the purposes of the UMRA, the Agency 
  certifies that this DFR does not mandate that State, local, or Tribal 
  governments adopt new, unfunded regulatory obligations. Further, OSHA 
  concludes that the rule would not impose a Federal mandate on the 
  private sector in excess of $100 million (adjusted annually for 
  inflation) in expenditures in any one year.
  
  List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1910
  
      Beryllium, General industry, Health, Occupational safety and 
  health.
  
      Signed at Washington, DC, on April 27, 2018.
  Loren Sweatt,
  Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
  
  Amendments to Standards
  
      For the reasons stated in the preamble, OSHA amends 29 CFR part 
  1910 as follows:
  
  PART 1910--OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS
  
  Subpart Z--Toxic and Hazardous Substances
  
  0
  1. The authority section for subpart Z of part 1910 continues to read 
  as follows:
  
      Authority: 29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657) Secretary of Labor's Order 
  No. 12-71 (36 FR 8754), 8-76 (41 FR 25059), 9-83 (48 FR 35736), 1-90 
  (55 FR 9033), 6-96 (62 FR 111), 3-2000 (65 FR 50017), 5-2002 (67 FR 
  65008), 5-2007 (72 FR 31160), 4-2010 (75 FR 55355), or 1-2012 (77 FR 
  3912), 29 CFR part 1911; and 5 U.S.C. 553, as applicable.
  
      Section 1910.1030 also issued under Pub. L. 106-430, 114 Stat. 
  1901.
      Section 1910.1201 also issued under 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.
  
  0
  2. Amend Sec.  1910.1024 as follows:

  
  0
  a. Revise the definition of ``Beryllium work area'' in paragraph (b);
  0
  b. Add definitions for ``Contaminated with beryllium and beryllium-
  contaminated'' and ``Dermal contact with beryllium'' in alphabetical 
  order in paragraph (b);
  0
  c. Revise the definition of ``Emergency'' in paragraph (b);
  0
  d. Revise paragraph (f)(2);
  0
  e. Revise paragraph (h)(3)(ii);
  0
  f. Revise paragraphs (i)(3)(i)(B), (i)(3)(ii)(B), (i)(4)(i) and (ii); 
  and
  0
  g. Revise paragraphs (j)(1)(i), (j)(2)(i) and (ii), and (j)(3).
      The revisions and additions read as follows:
  
  
  Sec.  1910.1024  Beryllium.
  
  * * * * *
      (b) * * *
      Beryllium work area means any work area:
      (i) Containing a process or operation that can release beryllium 
  and that involves material that contains at least 0.1 percent beryllium 
  by weight; and
      (ii) Where employees are, or can reasonably be expected to be, 
  exposed to airborne beryllium at any level or where there is the 
  potential for dermal contact with beryllium.
  * * * * *
      Contaminated with beryllium and beryllium-contaminated mean 
  contaminated with dust, fumes, mists, or solutions containing beryllium 
  in concentrations greater than or equal to 0.1 percent by weight.
      Dermal contact with beryllium means skin exposure to:
      (i) Soluble beryllium compounds containing beryllium in 
  concentrations greater than or equal to 0.1 percent by weight;
      (ii) Solutions containing beryllium in concentrations greater than 
  or equal to 0.1 percent by weight; or
      (iii) Dust, fumes, or mists containing beryllium in concentrations 
  greater than or equal to 0.1 percent by weight.
  * * * * *
      Emergency means any occurrence such as, but not limited to, 
  equipment failure, rupture of containers, or failure of control 
  equipment, which may or does result in an uncontrolled and unintended 
  release of airborne beryllium that presents a significant hazard.
  * * * * *
      (f) * * *
      (2) Engineering and work practice controls. (i) The employer must 
  use engineering and work practice controls to reduce and maintain 
  employee airborne exposure to beryllium to or below the PEL and STEL, 
  unless the employer can demonstrate that such controls are not 
  feasible. Wherever the employer demonstrates that it is not feasible to 
  reduce airborne exposure to or below the PELs with engineering and work 
  practice controls, the employer must implement and maintain engineering 
  and work practice controls to reduce airborne exposure to the lowest 
  levels feasible and supplement these controls using respiratory 
  protection in accordance with paragraph (g) of this standard.
      (ii) For each operation in a beryllium work area that releases 
  airborne beryllium, the employer must ensure that at least one of the 
  following is in place to reduce airborne exposure:
      (A) Material and/or process substitution;
      (B) Isolation, such as ventilated partial or full enclosures;
      (C) Local exhaust ventilation, such as at the points of operation, 
  material handling, and transfer; or
      (D) Process control, such as wet methods and automation.
      (iii) An employer is exempt from using the controls listed in 
  paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this standard to the extent that:
      (A) The employer can establish that such controls are not feasible; 
  or
      (B) The employer can demonstrate that airborne exposure is below 
  the action level, using no fewer than two representative personal 
  breathing zone samples taken at least 7 days apart, for each affected 
  operation.
  * * * * *
      (h) * * *
      (3) * * *
      (ii) The employer must ensure that beryllium is not removed from 
  beryllium-contaminated personal protective clothing and equipment by 
  blowing, shaking, or any other means that disperses beryllium into the 
  air.
  * * * * *
      (i) * * *
      (3) * * *
      (i) * * *
      (B) Employee's hair or body parts other than hands, face, and neck 
  can reasonably be expected to become contaminated with beryllium.
      (ii) * * *
      (B) The employee's hair or body parts other than hands, face, and 
  neck could reasonably have become contaminated with beryllium.
      (4) * * *
      (i) Beryllium-contaminated surfaces in eating and drinking areas 
  are as free as practicable of beryllium;
      (ii) No employees enter any eating or drinking area with beryllium-
  contaminated personal protective clothing or equipment unless, prior to 
  entry, surface beryllium has been removed from the clothing or 
  equipment by methods that do not disperse beryllium into the air or 
  onto an employee's body; and
  * * * * *
      (j) * * *
      (1) * * *
      (i) The employer must maintain all surfaces in beryllium work areas 
  and regulated areas as free as practicable of beryllium and in 
  accordance with the written exposure control plan required under 
  paragraph (f)(1) and the cleaning methods required under paragraph 
  (j)(2) of this standard; and
  * * * * *
      (2) * * *
      (i) The employer must ensure that surfaces in beryllium work areas 
  and regulated areas are cleaned by HEPA-filtered vacuuming or other 
  methods that minimize the likelihood and level of airborne exposure.
      (ii) The employer must not allow dry sweeping or brushing for 
  cleaning surfaces in beryllium work areas or regulated areas unless 
  HEPA-filtered vacuuming or other methods that minimize the likelihood 
  and level of airborne exposure are not safe or effective.
  * * * * *
      (3) Disposal and recycling. For materials that contain beryllium in 
  concentrations of 0.1 percent by weight or more or are contaminated 
  with beryllium, the employer must ensure that:
      (i) Materials designated for disposal are disposed of in sealed, 
  impermeable enclosures, such as bags or containers, that are labeled in 
  accordance with paragraph (m)(3) of this standard; and
      (ii) Materials designated for recycling are cleaned to be as free 
  as practicable of surface beryllium contamination and labeled in 
  accordance with paragraph (m)(3) of this standard, or place in sealed, 
  impermeable enclosures, such as bags or containers, that are labeled in 
  accordance with paragraph (m)(3) of this standard.
  * * * * *
  [FR Doc. 2018-09306 Filed 5-4-18; 8:45 am]
   BILLING CODE 4510-26-P