Federal Registers - Table of Contents Federal Registers - Table of Contents
• Publication Date: 11/03/1992
• Publication Type: Unified Agenda
• Fed Register #: 57:51593
• Title: Semi-Annual Regulatory Agenda


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) Prerule Stage
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

2019. MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS FOR EMPLOYEES

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: Not yet determined

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On January 19, 1989, OSHA modified (54 FR 2332) the Z table permissible exposure limits of 29 CFR 1910.1000 in response to current scientific data. Section 6(b) of the Act requires where appropriate, provision for medical surveillance in each 6(b) rulemaking for a harmful substance. A generic standard for medical surveillance would satisfy the requirements of the Act thus enabling the Agency to deal directly with the narrower issues of the revision of the tables. OSHA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on September 27, 1933, (53 FR 37595) to acquire additional information. OSHA also intends to review its compliance experience with medical surveillance provisions and seek experienced medical opinion in the form of a symposium or other public discussion. In addition, OSHA initiated a survey in 1990 to collect information regarding the prevalence and effectiveness of current medical surveillance programs. In October 1992, OSHA will determine whether or not to proceed with rulemaking.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 09/27/88 53 FR 37595
ANPRM 12/27/88
    Comment
    Period End
Next Action to 10/00/92
    be Determined

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB00


2020. EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT PROGRAMS FOR EMPLOYEES EXPOSED TO HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: Not yet determined

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On January 19, 1989, OSHA modified (54 FR 2332) the Z table permissible exposure limits of 29 CFR 1910.1000 (General Industry) in response to current scientific data. Section 6(b)(7) of the Act requires provisions for exposure monitoring for each substance undergoing 6(b) rulemaking. A generic standard for exposure monitoring would satisfy the monitoring requirement of the Act thus enabling the Agency to deal directly with the narrower issues of the revision of the Z tables. OSHA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on September 27, 1988, (53 FR 37591). OSHA intends to review its compliance experience with exposure monitoring provisions and seek expert opinion to determine the appropriateness of generic exposure monitoring provisions. In addition, OSHA initiated a survey in 1990 to collect information regarding the prevalence and effectiveness of current exposure assessment programs. OSHA will determine whether or not to proceed with rulemaking in October 1992.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 09/27/88 53 FR 37591
ANPRM 12/27/88
    Comment
    Period End
Next Action to 10/00/92
    be Determined

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue Nw., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB01


2021. ERGONOMIC SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 40 USC 333

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has reported the number of reported "disorders associated with repeated trauma" have more than doubled since 1984. These serious, potentially crippling disorders account for 48 percent of all occupational illnesses reported to OSHA in 1988, up from 28 percent in 1984. These disorders are being recognized as very serious problems by the industrial nations of the world and some have promulgated ergonomic standards in the last several years. In November 1988, OSHA received a petition from a meat packing industry representative requesting the development of a standard covering ergonomic issues. Prior to issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), OSHA will publish an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to gather, review, and analyze available information in industry on individual case studies, anecdotal data, and statistical data in which ergonomic hazards have been addressed and resolved. OSHA also will seek this information from a variety of other sources.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 08/03/92 57 FR 34192
ANPRM 02/01/93
    Comment
    Period End
NPRM 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Directorate of Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB36


2022. INDOOR AIR QUALITY IN THE WORKPLACE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655

CFR Citation: 29 CFR Not yet determined

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Health complaints related to indoor air quality (IAQ) have increased significantly following energy conservation measures instituted in the early seventies. Such measures have generally reduced the infiltration of outside air, allowing the build-up of indoor air contaminants. Adverse health effects associated with indoor air contaminants are classified as: (1) sick building syndrome which is characterized by general complaints that may include headaches, fatigue, nausea, mucous membrane (eye, nose, and throat) irritation, coughs, and muscle pain; and (2) building-related illness which describes those specific medical conditions of known etiology which can often be documented by physical signs and laboratory findings. These include respiratory allergies and Legionnaires' disease. A particular concern with matters dealing with indoor air quality is exposure to passive tobacco smoke (PTS). A wide range of health effects caused by passive exposure to tobacco smoke have been reported by the Surgeon General, the National Research Council, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and private researchers, as well as by citizens reporting health effects due to exposure to passive smoke while at work. These effects range from acute annoyance and eye and respiratory tract irritation to the development of chronic pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, and lung cancer. OSHA received two petitions for an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) in May 1987. Both requested an ETS to prohibit smoking in all indoor workplaces except certain specified areas. OSHA determined that available data did not demonstrate the existence of a "grave danger," due to workplace exposure to passive tobacco smoke, as defined in Section 6(c) of the OSH Act. OSHA, therefore, denied the petitions on September 1, 1989. In response to the OSHA denial, a suit was filed by the Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia D.C. Circuit for a review of the Agency's decision and for an order pursuant to 5 USC, Section 706 setting aside the denial. The Court upheld OSHA's decision not to issue an ETS in an unpublished decision issued on May 10, 1991. OSHA published a request for information on Indoor Air Quality September 20, 1991 (56 FR 47892). Comment period was extended to March 20, 1992.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Request for 09/20/91 56 FR 47892
    information
Comment Period 01/21/92 56 FR 47892
    End
Next Action to 10/00/92
    be Determined

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3718, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB37


2023. CRANE SAFETY

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 40 USC 333; 33 USC 941 CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1926.550; 29 CPR 1926.552; 29 CFR 1926.553; 29 CFR 1926.554; 29 CFR 1926.556; 29 CFR 1910.67; 29 CFR 1910.179; 29 CFR 1910.180; 29 CFR 1919.181

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The present crane regulations for construction and general industry have not been revised since being promulgated in 1971. They rely heavily on outdated 1968 ANSI standards. OSHA has received comments that the existing provisions are inadequate and need revision to reflect current conditions and equipment. It has also been suggested that there is need to establish additional crane installation and use provisions, including possible certification programs for crane operators and riggers. OSHA anticipates that this project will come about in several phases due to the magnitude of the project.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 10/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Directorate of Safety Standards Program, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB38


2024. SAFETY AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655

CFR Citation: Not yet determined

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Current OSHA regulations address specific safety and health hazards or specific safety and health conditions. While thin approach offers discrete instruction to employers about to protect workers from specific exposures, the cumulative impact of these regulations often is perceived by the regulated public as resulting in duplicative, and sometimes contradictory requirements. The most obvious burden is created by the more than 200 separate standards requiring employee training on safety and health issues. The agency needs to identify methods to simplify and ease this regulatory burden without reducing the protections afforded employees. The agency believes, with almost unanimous public commentor support, the most effective way to accomplish this goal is to explore a generic training requirement in the broader context of a comprehensive workplace safety and health management program. The agency already published Voluntary Safety and Health Program Management Guidelines on January 26, 1989 (FR Vol. 54, NO. 16 Pages 3902 to 3916).

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Completion of 08/00/93
    Review of
    Current
    Training
    Requirements

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Ruth Knight, Director, Office of Program Evaluation, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3641, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8055

RIN: 1218-AB41


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) Proposed Rule Stage
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

2025. RESPIRATORY PROTECTION

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.134; 29 CFR 1915.152; 29 CFR 1918.102; 29 CFR 1926.103

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The present respiratory protection standards have been in place for more than 10 years and do not take into consideration the current state-of-the-art for respiratory protection. In addition, the general industry standard for respirators contains redundancies and includes several advisory provisions which should be eliminated or changed. OSHA has reviewed the current standards and intends to propose revisions. In developing this proposal, OSHA has been working closely with the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA).

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 05/14/82 47 FR 20803
ANPRM 09/13/82
    Comment
    Period End
Public Comment 11/29/85
    Period on
    Preproposal
    Draft Ends
NPRM 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA05


2026. SAFETY AND HEALTH REGULATIONS FOR LONGSHORING (PART 1918)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655 Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970; 33 USC 941 Longshore and Harborworkers Compensation Act CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.16; 29 CFR 1918 (Revision)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The purpose of this regulatory action would be to update and revise a standard first issued in 1960. The current language in many instances addresses the hazards of cargo handling involving methods long since abandoned, and fails to address the serious hazards of newer methods. Because much of the current standard is out of date, there are problems with compliance. These revised requirements will provide both employers and employees with a blueprint for effective and safe work practices in the cargo handling industry. No alternative other than revision is contemplated. The annual cost of the revision is expected to be minimal -- less than five million dollars.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 02/00/93

Small Entities Affected: Businesses

Government Levels Affected: None

Sectors Affected: 44 Water Transportation

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605 FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA56


2027. STEEL ERECTION (PART 1926)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655; 40 USC 333

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1926.750 (Revision); 29 CFR 1926.751 (Revision); 29 CFR 1926.752 (Revision)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This action will consolidate, clarify, and revise the existing provisions governing steel erection assembly, flooring, bolting, riveting, fitting-up, plumbing-up, and fall protection. When completed, the revised fall protection requirements may be relocated and be incorporated into Subpart M (of Part 1926) which is the general fall protection standard.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: None

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-4061

RIN: 1218-AA65


2028. WELDING, CUTTING AND BRAZING (PART 1910 AND PART 1926)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.251; 29 CFR 1910.252; 29 CFR 1910.253; 29 CFR 1910.254; 29 CFR 1926.350; 29 CFR 1926.351; 29 CFR 1926.352; 29 CFR 1926.354

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: OSHA proposes to revise and update its existing Part 1910 and Part 1926 subparts covering welding, cutting and brazing operations, and to develop performance oriented standards designed to reduce the number of deaths and injuries due to unsafe equipment and unsafe operations. There has been no substantial revision to these subparts since their adoption in 1971. A complete and comprehensive revision is needed at this time to bring the standards into line with the current state-of- the-art and updated consensus standards. In developing its proposed revision for welding provisions in Part 1910 (General Industry), OSHA has determined that a similar revision to the Part 1926 (Construction Industry) welding provisions are warranted.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Next Action Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: None

Sectors Affected: Multiple

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Ave. Nw., Rm N3605, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA72


2029. GLYCOL ETHERS: 2-METHOXYETHANOL, 2-ETHOXYETHANOL AND THEIR ACETATES

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655; 29 USC 657

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1000

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On May 20, 1986, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a report to OSHA, under Section 9(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act, stating that EPA has reasonable basis to conclude that the risk of injury to worker health from exposure to four glycol ethers during their manufacture, processing and use is unreasonable, and that this risk may be prevented or reduced to a significant extent by OSHA regulatory action. EPA gave OSHA 180 days in which to respond to its report. OSHA published its response on December 11, 1986, stating that OSHA had preliminarily concluded that occupational exposures to the subject glycol ethers at the current OSHA permissible exposure limits may present significant risks to the health of workers. OSHA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on April 2, 1987, (52 FR 10586). OSHA will use the information received in response to the ANPRM, as well as other information and analysis, to prepare a proposed standard.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 04/02/87 52 FR 10586
ANPRM 07/31/87
    Comment
    Period End
NPRM 10/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue Nw., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA84


2030. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910, subpart H

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, November 15, 1991.

Abstract: Standards in 29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart H, which address the storage, handling and use of hazardous materials, such as compressed gases, acetylene, hydrogen, oxygen, liquified petroleum gases, and flammable and combustible liquids, will be revised. This regulatory action will provide a new approach to the revision of Subpart H and will occur in four phases in an expanded timeframe. The four phases will be (1) Process Safety Management, (2) Flammable and Compressed Gases, (3) Hazardous Liquids, and (4) Explosives. The first phase of the proposed action is intended to better protect employees from unexpected releases of significant quantities of dangerous substances, and this phase has been completed. The remaining phases are intended to simplify, clarify and consolidate standards on hazardous materials and assist employers and employees in general industry to better understand and better focus on the hazards inherent in the use, handling, and storage of such materials.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Phase I 02/24/92 57 FR 6356
    Completed
Administrator 06/01/92 57 FR 23060
    Stay of
    Selected
    Provisions and
    Request for
    Comments
Effective Date of 08/27/92 57 FR 38600
    Stayed
    Provisions

Next Action Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Government Levels Affected: None

Additional Information: This action includes three previous actions: (a) Hazardous Materials--Flammable and Compressed Gases (Part 1910); (b) Hazardous Materials--Flammable and Combustible Liquids (Part 1910); and (c) Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (completed), and adds a new action, Explosives: as the fourth phase of this regulatory action.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB20


2031. SHIPYARD EMPLOYMENT: PHASE II (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.1 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.31 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.91 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.111 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.131 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.161 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.171 et seq; 29 CFR 1915.181; 29 CFR 1910.13 et seq; 29 CFR 1910.14; 29 CFR 1910.15; 29 CFR 1910.95; 29 CFR 1910.96; 29 CFR 1910.97; 29 CFR 1910.141;

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will complete the consolidation and updating of Parts 1915 and 1910 by providing shipyard employees with coverage under one comprehensive OSHA standard. This revision effort will involve the promulgation of 20 maritime subparts. Its completion will be done in stages and will relieve shipyard owners from the burden of having to comply with two sets of rules that are complex, prescriptive, confusing and, in some cases, conflicting. OSHA has established an Advisory Committee to assist the Agency in reviewing and revising these subparts. Experts from government, industry, unions and the states are working with OSHA on this project. A previously identified project, Surface Preparation and Preservation (RIN: 1218-AA96), will be included in this project.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: None

Government Levels Affected: None

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB22


2032. RECORDING AND REPORTING OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND ILLNESSES

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 657; 29 USC 673

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1904.1

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Concerns about the reliability and utility of injury and illness data have been raised by Congress, OSHA, NIOSH, BLS, the National Academy of Sciences, OMB, the General Accounting Office and representatives of business and labor. The revision of the regulations, forms, and associated interpretive material are being undertaken to simplify the injury and illness recordkeeping system. OSHA is currently working on this project and has not collected sufficient information to determine the effect on paperwork burden. Benefits will include: (1) A system that is easier for employers, employees and government personnel to use; (2) increased reliability and utility of the records; (3) comprehensive records of the injury and illness experience at a given site will be available; and (4) employee involvement and awareness in safety and health matters will be enhanced.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 01/00/93

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations

Government Levels Affected: Local, State

Sectors Affected: All

Analysis: Regulatory Impact Analysis

Agency Contact: Stephen A. Newell, Acting Director, Office of Statistics, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3507, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-1463

RIN: 1218-AB24


2033. PEL UPDATE PROPOSAL FOR CONSTRUCTION, AGRICULTURE, AND MARITIME

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655; 29 USC 657

CFR Citation: Not yet determined

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The permissible exposure limits (PELs) promulgated by OSHA in 1971 do not reflect current knowledge of the health effects of many toxic substances. OSHA published a proposal on June 7, 1988 (53 FR 20960) to amend and expand the PELs for general industry. On January 19, 1989 OSHA set new PELs for the toxic substances originally covered in 1971 and covered new substances in a single rulemaking that applied to general industry. OSHA now plans to update the old PELs for construction, maritime, and possible agricultural sectors not covered by the general industry proceeding. The PELs for these sectors are outdated: the construction industry (29 CFR 1926) references the 1970 ACGIH TLVs; the maritime industry cites three different references--29 CFR 1918 (longshoring), "dangerous gaseous contaminants not immediately dangerous to life" and "heavy concentrations of dusts." In addition, in the agricultural section, OSHA will consider the fact that chemicals and pesticides are currently regulated by EPA. As a result of this rulemaking, OSHA expects that a unified table of PELs for toxic substances will be adopted for all industries. On June 12, 1992 (57 FR 26001), OSHA published a propose rule that would provide more protective PELs on hundreds of toxic airborne substances for workers in construction, agriculture, and maritime. OSHA will be publishing a Federal Register notice delaying hearings and extending comment period nine months.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 06/12/92 57 FR 26001
NPRM Comment 09/25/92
   Period End

Next Action Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3718, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB26


2034. CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY (LOCKOUT/TAGOUT)--CONSTRUCTION (PART 1926)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910; 29 CFR 1926

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Hazards at construction sites resulting from the absence of effective lockout/tagout procedures to control hazardous energy appear to be caused by several factors, all associated with the nature of the construction industry. These factors basically relate to such considerations as the types of machines and equipment found in construction; the makeup of the industry in which employment is relatively "short term," lasting only as long as the length of the current project; the presence of multiple employers having different employer/employee relationships and the temporary nature of the "in-the-field" maintenance activity. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) expects the proposal to address lockout- related hazards in those construction work-site areas in which the available data indicate these hazards to be significant. Regulatory options involve developing a comprehensive standard covering all potentially hazardous energy sources. OSHA will consider the use of the construction advisory committee to assist in the development of this standard.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB30


2035. POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCK OPERATOR TRAINING

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.178

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Nationally, fatalities due to unsafe operation of industrial vehicles and equipment account for approximately 12 percent of the private sector fatalities. This is the second leading cause of fatalities in the private sector, behind only highway vehicle fatalities. The present standard has proven to be ineffective in reducing the number of accidents involving powered industrial trucks. OSHA intends to revise the present standard to increase its effectiveness by requiring, in performance language, initial and refresher training as necessary. The frequency of the refresher training will be based upon the ability of the vehicle operator to retain the knowledge, skills and abilities to perform the job safely. OSHA will also give guidance as to what information the instruction should include. There will also be other amendments to the standard to increase its effectiveness.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Next Action Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB33


2036. LEAD IN CONSTRUCTION

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: Not yet determined

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1926

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On November 14, 1978 (43 FR 52952), OSHA promulgated a standard that limited occupational exposures to lead. The standard also contained requirements for exposure monitoring, protective equipment, housekeeping and hygiene practices, medical surveillance, medical removal protection, posted areas and education and training. However, the scope of the standard did not include the construction industry. Lead exposures in the construction industry continued to be regulated by the air contaminants standard for construction (29 CFR 1926.55) which has no protective ancillary provisions such as those contained in the general industry standard. This standard adopted the 1970 American Conference for Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (200 ug/m3) which is four times the current standard for general industry. OSHA recognized that this level represents a potential for material impairment of health and is in the process of developing a proposal.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 12/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3718, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB34


2037. DOCUMENTATION OF ABATEMENT

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 657; 29 USC 658; 29 USC 659

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1903

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: A critical element of OSHA's comprehensive enforcement strategy under the Occupational Safety and Health act is assurance that employers have abated hazards cited during inspections. Currently, unless an employer voluntarily complies with OSHA's request to submit documentation, OSHA has no proof of hazard abatement without conducting a followup inspection. From 1972 to the present, OSHA has implemented several administrative measures to induce employers to provide abatement documentation, but some 30 percent of cited employers still do not voluntarily do so. OSHA's internal audits, the Department of Labor's Inspector General, and the General Accounting Office have pointed out this deficiency. The regulation OSHA now proposes will require cited employers to provide hazard abatement documentation. The NPRM will address the kinds of evidence to be required, what notice to employees is needed, potential penalties for non-reporting, possible certification forms for compliance, and other questions. Work on this project has not progressed to the point where costs and benefits of possible regulatory approaches can be determined.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 12/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Raymond E. Donnelly, Director, General Industry Compliance Assistance, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3119, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8041

RIN: 1218-AB40


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) Final Rule Stage
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

2038. METHODS OF COMPLIANCE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1000(e); 29 CFR 1910.134(a)(1)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: OSHA's policy concerning the use of engineering controls and respirators was targeted for review by the President's Task Force on Regulatory Relief in 1981. Current OSHA regulations require that employers implement feasible engineering controls to maintain air contaminant concentrations in the workplace at or below the prescribed permissible exposure limits. The use of respirators is permitted only in those cases where engineering controls are not feasible, not yet installed, or not adequate. This policy has been criticized as being inflexible, not cost-effective, and often unnecessary for employee health protection. OSHA believes that any changes to the policy for use of engineering controls must be closely coordinated with revisions in the respiratory protection regulations (29 CFR 1910.134). This rulemaking does not address the assessment and reduction of any absolute existing risks, but rather addresses the possible change in risk abatement associated with the use of respirators instead of engineering controls. OSHA published a proposal on June 5, 1989 (54 FR 23991). Hearings were held on May 30-31, 1990, and continued on July 9- 10, 1990.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 02/22/83 48 FR 7473
ANPRM 06/22/83
    Comment
    Period End
NPRM 06/05/89 54 FR 23991
NPRM Comment 10/03/89
    Period End
Final Action 10/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Additional Information: Post-hearing comments were due by October 9, 1990, and responses to post-hearing comments were due by December 10, 1990. In response to oral petitions from participants, the post-bearing comment period was extended to January 14, 1991. OSHA will use the information received in response to the proposal to develop a final rule.

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Rm N3718, FP Bldg, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA28


2039. FALL PROTECTION (PART 1926)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 40 USC 333

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1926.104; 29 CFR 1926.105; 29 CFR 1926.500; 29 CFR 1926.501; 29 CFR 1926.502; 29 CFR 1926.107(b); 29 CFR 1926.250(b)(2); 29 CFR 1926.651(t); 29 CFR 1926.951(b)(4)(i); 29 CFR 1926.107(c); 29 CFR 1926.107(f); 29 CFR 1926.651(w)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The existing standard has been proposed for revision because it is poorly formatted, contains unnecessary and restrictive provisions, and does not properly address the fall protection needs of certain areas and operations. The proposal raises several significant issues including (1) when fall protection systems must be installed, (2) whether work surface inspections are necessary to insure adequate structural integrity before commencing work, and (3) whether body belt systems or body harness systems are appropriate for use as fall protection. (Subpart M revised)

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/25/86 51 FR 42680
NPRM Comment 08/14/87 52 FR 20616
    Period End
Reopening of 08/05/92 57 FR 34656
    Rulemaking
    Record
    Comment
    Period Ends
    11/3/92
Final Action 05/00/93

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: This agenda entry is part of Regulatory Program RIN 1218-AB05; Elevated Surfaces (Part 1926).

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Rm N3605, FP Bldg, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA37


2040. SCAFFOLDS (PART 1926)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 40 USC 333

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1926.451; 29 CFR 1926.452; 29 CFR 1910.28; 29 CFR 1910.29; 29 CFR 1926.752(k)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: The existing standard has been proposed for revision because it is poorly formatted, contains unnecessary and restrictive provisions, and omits necessary specific coverage for certain types of scaffolds. The proposal raises several significant issues including: (1) the use of crossbraces as guardrails, (2) the use of fall protection during scaffold erection and dismantling operations, and (3) the role of engineers in scaffold design. (Subpart L, revised)

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/25/86 51 FR 42680
NPRM Comment 08/14/87 52 FR 20616
    Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: This agenda entry is part of Regulatory Program RIN 1218-AB05; Elevated Surfaces (Part 1926).

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA40


2041. FALL PROTECTION SYSTEMS (PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT)(PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910, subpart I

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Existing standards do not contain criteria for personal fall protection systems. Consequently, requirements containing criteria for personal fall protection systems would be added to 29 CFR part 1910, Subpart I, Personal Protection Equipment, to enhance employee protection from injury and death due to falls to different elevations.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 04/10/90 55 FR 13423
NPRM Comment 08/22/90 55 FR 13423
    Period End
Hearing 09/11/90 55 FR 29224
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: 1218-AA48 will be issued concurrently with 1218-AB04.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA48


2042. CONFINED SPACE (PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.146

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Entry into confined spaces has been responsible for many employee deaths and injuries. However, current standards do not specifically address the hazards associated with entry into confined spaces. Therefore, OSHA is proposing certain criteria and precautions which are necessary to minimize the hazards associated with employees entering confined spaces.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 06/05/89 54 FR 24080
NPRM Comment 10/04/89 54 FR 30557
    Period End
Final Action 11/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Analysis: Regulatory Impact Analysis

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA51


2043. LOGGING OPERATIONS (PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.266 (Revision)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Logging is a very hazardous industry. It has an incidence rate nearly twice that of manufacturing, and reflecting the seriousness of the injuries incurred, a lost workday rate nearly four times as high. The purpose of the standard will be to protect workers from the ever-present hazards of chain saw operation, falling objects (trees, branches), rolling or sliding logs, falls from trees, and materials handling accidents. At present there is no OSHA standard specifically applicable to logging in general. There is a standard, 29 CFR 1910.266, applicable only to pulp wood logging; however, pulpwood logging is estimated to account for less than half of the logging activity in the United States. Development of a national OSHA standard addressing all types of logging will provide coverage for those loggers not now protected. The new regulation will provide coverage where there is no approved state regulation and will set a minimum safety level for those states that chose to develop a state regulation.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 05/02/89 54 FR 18798
NPRM Comment 07/31/89
    Period End
Public Hearing 05/11/90 55 FR 19745
    07/24/90
Final Action 02/00/93

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Sectors Affected: 24 Lumber and Wood Products, Except Furniture

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA52


2044. ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION, TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION (PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.137; 29 CFR 1910.269

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: A major area of coverage not addressed in the current OSHA electrical standards for general industry (29 CFR 1910) involves the maintenance and operation practices associated with electrical transmission and distribution lines, substations and generating stations. It is intended that the proposed standard fill this void by establishing minimum requirements for electrical safety work practices for qualified employees working on or near installations whose purpose is the generation and distribution of electricity. The proposal also revises the standards for electrical protective equipment, which is used routinely for electrical power work.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 01/31/89 54 FR 4974
NPRM Comment 06/01/89
   Period End
Public Hearing 08/03/89 54 FR 31970
   Scheduled for
   11/28/89
Reopening of the 11/09/90 55 FR 47074
   Record and
   Request for
   Public
    Comment
Final Action 01/00/93

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Sectors Affected: Multiple

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA59


2045. FALL PROTECTION IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.201; 29 CFR 1915.202; 29 CFR 1915.203; 29 CFR 1915.73; 29 CFR 1915.74; 29 CFR 1915.75; 29 CFR 1915.77

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will revise the existing shipyard standard covering fall protection and will consolidate all related and applicable 29 CFR part 1910 provisions into 29 CFR part 1915. The revision will develop, in part, performance- oriented standards, address current gaps in coverage, address new technology and eliminate outmoded and redundant provisions.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/29/88 53 FR 48166
NPRM Comment 02/27/89
   Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: Applicable part 1910 provisions under consideration: 29 CFR 1910.21-1910.23.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA66


2046. SCAFFOLDS IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.71; 29 CFR 1910.28; 29 CFR 1910.29

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will revise the existing shipyard standards covering scaffolds and will consolidate all related and applicable 29 CFR part 1910 provisions into 29 CFR part 1915. The revision will develop, in part, performance- oriented standards, address current gaps in coverage, address new technology, and eliminate outmoded and redundant provisions.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/29/88 53 FR 48182
NPRM Comment 02/27/89
   Period End

Next Action Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: Applicable part 1910 provisions under consideration: 29 CFR 1910.28 - 1910.29.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA68


2047. ACCESS AND EGRESS IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.72; 29 CFR 1915.74; 29 CFR 1915.75; 29 CFR 1915.76

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will revise the existing shipyard standards covering access and egress and will consolidate all related and applicable 29 CFR part 1910 provisions into 29 CFR Part 1915. The revision will develop, in part, performance-oriented standards, address current gaps in coverage, address new technology, and eliminate outmoded and redundant provisions.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/29/88 53 FR 48130
NPRM Comment 02/27/89
   Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: Applicable part 1910 provisions under consideration: 29 CFR 1910.24-1910.27; 29 CFR 1910.36-1910.37.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA70


2048. FACE, HEAD, EYE AND FOOT PROTECTION (PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT)(PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Existing standards for eye, face, head, and foot protection reference outdated national consensus standards which have been updated and improved. Consequently, criteria for personal protective equipment for eye, face, head, and foot would be revised to reflect improved developments in these types of equipment. This would allow the use of better personal protective equipment and would result in improved employee protection from eye, face, head, and foot hazards.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 08/16/89 54 FP 33832
NPRM Comment 10/16/89
Period End
Public Hearing 02/01/90 55 FF 3412
   Held April 3,
   1990
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605 FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA71


2049. WELDING, CUTTING AND HEATING IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.51; 29 CFR 1915.52; 29 CFR 1915.53; 29 CFR 1915.54; 29 CFR 1915.55; 29 CFR 1915.56; 29 CFR 1915.57

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will revise the existing shipyard standard covering welding, cutting, and heating. The revision will develop, in part, a performance-oriented standard, address current gaps in coverage, recognize new technology, and eliminate outmoded or redundant provisions. In addition, it will consolidate 29 CFR part 1915 standards and applicable 29 CFR part 1910 standards into one set of provisions.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/29/88 53 FR 48111
NPRM Comment 02/27/89
    Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Businesses

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: Applicable part 1910 provisions under consideration: 29 CFR 1910.251-1910.252.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA73


2050. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT IN SHIPYARDS (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.151; 29 CFR 1915.152; 29 CFR 1915.153; 29 CFR 1915.154; 29 CFR 1915.155; 29 CFR 1915.156, 29 CFR 1915.157; 29 CFR 1915.158; 29 CFR 1915.159

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will revise the existing shipyard standard covering personal protective equipment. The revision will develop, in part, a performance-oriented standard, address current gaps in coverage, recognize new technology, and eliminate outmoded-or redundant provisions. It will consolidate 29 CFR part 1915 standards and applicable 29 CFR part 1910 standards into one set of provisions.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/29/88 53 FR 48150
NPRM Comment 02/27/89
    Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: Applicable part 1910 provisions under consideration: 29 CFR 1910.132-1910.137.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Rm N3605, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AA74


2051. 1,3-BUTADIENE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1000 (Table Z-1); 29 CFR 1910.1051

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On October 10, 1985, EPA referred 1,3-butadiene (BD) to OSHA for possible regulatory action under section 9(a) of the Toxic Substance Control Act. On April 11, 1986, OSHA responded to the EPA referral indicating that the Agency has preliminarily concluded that BD poses risk to the occupationally exposed population at the current OSHA permissible exposure limit and that the risk can be reduced or prevented through the promulgation of a revised standard. On October 1, 1986 (51 FR 35003). OSHA published an ANPRM initiating regulatory action within the meaning of section 9(a) of TSCA. Comments were submitted to OSHA by December 30, 1986. Based on the comments received in response to the ANPRM OSHA developed a proposal which was published on August 10, 1990. Hearings were held in Washington, D.C. on January 15, 1991, and in New Orleans, Louisiana on February 20, 1991. Submission of the post-hearing comments and briefs were scheduled to end on June 22, and July 22, 1991 respectively; however, OSHA extended the dates to September 27, and October 28, 1991. The post- hearing comments and briefs were again extended and finally closed on November 26, 1991 and February 10, 1992, respectively.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

EPA Referral 10/10/85 50 FR 41393
Request for 12/27/85 50 FR 52952
   Comments
Response to 04/11/86 51 FR 12526
   EPA Referral
ANPRM 10/01/86 51 FR 35003
ANPRM 12/30/86
   Comment
    Period End
NPRM 08/10/90 55 FR 32736
NPRM Comment 10/19/90 55 FR 32736
    Period End
Final Action 12/00/93

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA83


2052. EXPLOSIVE AND OTHER DANGEROUS ATMOSPHERES (PART 1915)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 33 USC 941

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1915.11; 29 CFR 1915.12; 29 CFR 1915.13; 29 CFR 1915.14; 29 CFR 1915.15; 29 CFR 1915.16

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: This regulatory action will revise the existing shipyard standard covering explosive and other dangerous atmospheres. This revision will develop, in part, a performance- oriented standard, address any gaps in coverage, recognize new technology, and eliminate outmoded or redundant standards.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 11/29/88 53 FR 48092
NPRM Comment 02/27/89
    Period End
NPRM Comment 06/24/92 57 FR 28152
   Period
   Reopened Until
   9/22/92
Final Action 02/00/93

Small Entities Affected: None

Government Levels Affected: State, Federal

Sectors Affected: 373 Ship and Boat Building and Repairing

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8063

RIN: 1218-AA91


2053. METHYLENE CHLORIDE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655; 29 USC 657

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1000

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: In July 1985, OSHA was petitioned by the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) to issue a hazard alert; issue an emergency temporary standard; and to begin work on a new permanent standard for methylene chloride (DCM). This request was based on information obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Toxicology Program indicating that DCM is an animal carcinogen and may have the potential to cause cancer in humans. In November 1986, OSHA notified the UAW that its petition had been granted, in part, and denied, in part. Specifically, OSHA issued a set of guidelines for controlling occupational exposure to DCM and OSHA denied that portion of the petition requesting the issuance of an emergency temporary standard. OSHA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on November 24, 1986 (51 FR 42257). After reviewing and analyzing the comments received in response to the ANPRM, OSHA published a proposal in the Federal Register on November 7, 1991 (56 FR 57036). The comment period closed on April 6, 1992. On June 9, 1992, OSHA published a notice of informal public hearings to be held in Washington, DC on September 16, 1992 and in San Francisco, CA on October 14, 1992. The notice also reopened the comment period until August 24, 1992.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 11/24/86 51 FR 42257
ANPRM 02/23/87 51 FR 42257
   Comment
    Period End
NPRM 11/07/91 56 FR 57036
NPRM Comment 04/06/92
    Period End
Final Action 09/00/93

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Rm 3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA98


2054. HAZARD COMMUNICATION

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 653; 29 USC 655; 29 USC 657; 33 USC 941; 40 USC 333, 5 USC 553

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1200; 29 CFR 1915.99; 29 CFR 1917.28; 29 CFR 1918.90; 29 CFR 1926.59; 29 CFR 1928.21

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: OSHA promulgated a final rule on August 24, 1987, that extended the protections of its Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) from the manufacturing sector to all other workplaces where employees are exposed to hazardous chemicals. The HCS requires covered employers to establish hazard communication programs for their employees, including labels on containers, material safety data sheets, and training programs. On August 8, 1988, OSHA published a NPRM to modify the final rule, and provide an opportunity for public comment. Public comments have been received, hearings have been held, and OSHA will prepare a final rule based on the public record for this standard, including the record developed in earlier rulemakings. OSHA published a request for information (RFI) on May 17, 1990, (55 FR 20580) to improve the quality and representation of the information provided on the MSDS's and labels and to consider a standardized format. OSHA will determine if the rule should be reopened after the comments and other relevant information are analyzed. The comment period for the RFI expired on August 15, 1990.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 11/27/85 50 FR 48794
ANPRM 02/25/86
   Comment
    Period Ends
NPRM 08/08/88 53 FR 29822
NPRM Comment 10/28/88
    Period End
Final Action 10/00/92

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB02


2055. WALKING AND WORKING SURFACES (PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.21; 29 CFR 1910.22; 29 CFR 1910.23; 29 CFR 1910.24; 29 CFR 1910.25; 29 CFR 1910.26; 29 CFR 1910.27; 29 CFR 1910.28, 29 CFR 1910.29; 29 CFR 1910.30; 29 CFR 1910.31; 29 CFR 1910.32

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Existing standards for walking and working surfaces need to be revised because they are out of date and restrict technological innovation. The proposed revision is performance- oriented and permits flexibility for compliance.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 04/10/90 55 FR 13360
NPRM Comment 08/22/90 55 FR 13360
    Period End
Hearing 09/11/90 55 FR 29224
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Small Entities Affected: None

Additional Information: 1218-AB04 will be issued concurrently with 1218-AA48.

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3605, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB04


2056. ASBESTOS (REMAND)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655 et seq

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1001; 29 CFR 1926.58

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On June 20, 1986, OSHA published revised standards governing occupational exposure to asbestos, tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite in general industry and construction. In these standards, OSHA reduced the 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) to 0.2 f/cc, and established other protective provisions. This standard was legally challenged, and as a result, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the standard except that the court held that OSHA must reconsider several of the standard's provisions to determine if more protective regulatory provisions are available to reduce risk. One of the issues to be reconsidered was the need for a short-term limit for occupational exposure to asbestos in response to the Court's directive. This limit was established as 1 f/cc averaged over a 30-minute sampling period and a legaL notification of this amendment was published on September 14, 1988, at 53 FR 35610. On December 20, 1989 (54 FR 52024) OSHA responded to the first three remand issues. OSHA deleted the ban on spraying asbestos containing materials, amended the regulatory text to clarify when construction employers must resume periodic monitoring; and explained why OSHA is not amending the regulatory text to clarify the limited exemption for "small-scale, short-duration operations" in the construction industry standard. OSHA published a notice of its resolution of Category II remand issues on February 5, 1990, and a notice of proposed rulemaking for Category III on July 20, 1990 (55 FR 29712). On September 20, 1990, the comment period was extended to December 3, 1990, and the public hearing was rescheduled to commence on January 23, 1991. The post-hearing comment period closed on April 26, 1991, and the briefing period was extended to July 24, 1991.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Asbestos 12/20/89 54 FR 52024
   Remand -
   Category I
   Issues
Asbestos 02/05/90 55 FR 3724
   Remand -
   Category II
   Effective Date
   5/7/90
Asbestos 02/05/90 55 FR 3724
   Remand -
   Category II
   Issues
Asbestos 07/20/90 55 FR 29712
   Remand -
   Category III
Hearing 10/23/90 55 FR 29712
Hearing 11/09/90 55 FR 40676
Final Action 12/00/92

Small Entities Affected: None

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3718, FP Bldg, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB25


2057. ACCREDITATION OF TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS (PART 1910)

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); PL 101-549 (November 15, 1990); 5 USC 552(a); 5 USC 533

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.121, subpart H

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Public Law 99-499 requires the Secretary of Labor to promulgate a final standard for Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response. The final standard was issued on March 6, 1989. Section 126 of Public Law 99-499 was amended by Congress on December 22, 1987 to require the Secretary of Labor to include in the final rule a training course certification program at least as comprehensive as the EPA's model program for asbestos abatement in public buildings. This proposed revision would add criteria and requirements for training course certification of training for workers involved in hazardous waste operations. Separately, OSHA has collected additional information on this rulemaking during the second half of CY 1991 on the characteristics of selected training programs for emergency response personnel for hazardous materials incidents. Accordingly, the Agency will be submitting this report to the public record in early 1992, and will be granting the public an opportunity to review and comment on the report and survey results. OSHA is presently reviewing comments submitted in response to a partial reopening of the record for this rulemaking. The notice was published February 10, 1992, and the comment period closed May 26, 1992. The opening of the record allowed public comment on a study, "Survey of Emergency Response Programs" conducted by OSHA to evaluate the effectiveness of current emergency response training programs.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 01/26/90 55 FR 2776
NPRM Comment 04/26/90 55 FR 2776
    Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Local, State, Federal

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Bldg, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB27


2058. OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN MOTOR VEHICLES

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b)

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.140; 29 CFR 1915.99; 29 CFR 1915.100; 29 CFR 1917.44; 29 CFR 1918.73; 29 CFR 1926.33; 29 CFR 1928.58

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: OSHA currently has no general regulation requiring that employers train their employees in the safe operation of motor vehicles on the job, including the required use of seat belts, although motor vehicle crashes are the single largest cause of occupational fatalities. On-the-job motor vehicle crashes, in both on-road and off-road vehicles, caused over 30 percent of traumatic work-related fatalities. In the manufacturing sector, which is the primary target of most OSHA regulations, more workers are killed by motor vehicles than by fixed machinery. The hazards faced by workers operating automobiles and trucks, both on public highways and at private facilities, could be greatly reduced by requiring employers to train their employees in safe driving techniques, including the required use of seat belts. OSHA plans to proceed with a single NPRM that would regulate all employers covered by the OSHA Act. The approach will be to develop a generic, performance-oriented standard. Various state regulations governing the use of seat belts, and related studies will be considered in this proposal. OSHA expects that the regulation could prevent as many as 684 fatalities each year.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 07/12/90 55 FR 28728
NPRM Comment 11/09/90 55 FR 28728
    Period End
Final Action 00/00/00

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions

Government Levels Affected: Local, State, Federal

Agency Contact: Roger A. Clark, Director, Safety Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3605, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-8061

RIN: 1218-AB28


2059. REPORTING OF FATALITY OR MULTIPLE HOSPITALIZATIONS

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 657; 29 USC 673

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1904.8

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: Concerns have been raised by Congress, OMB, OSHA, NIOSH, BLS, the National Academy of Sciences, GAO and representatives of business and labor about the reporting of fatalities and multiple hospitalizations. These include the procedures employers are required to follow, the length of time employers have to report the fatalities to OSHA and the number of hospitalizations required before the employer must report the incident to OSHA. In particular, 48 hour reporting may allow too many workplace factors to change before OSHA can reach the worksite to perform an adequate investigation of the incident. In addition, there are concerns that the current regulation may not adequately inform employers of the need to report all occupational fatalities, including those that occur over extended periods of time after the employee was originally injured. Benefits will include more accurate employer reporting of fatalities and multiple hospitalizations, an improved ability for OSHA to respond to serious accidents while evidence is still "fresh", an improved count of fatalities and multiple hospitalizations and an upgraded data base for researchers and policy officials.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 05/19/92 57 FR 21222
NPRM Comment 08/17/92
    Period End
Final Action 03/00/93

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations

Government Levels Affected: Local, State

Agency Contact: Stephen A. Newell, Acting Director, Office of Statistics, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3507, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 423-1473 423-1463

RIN: 1218-AB35


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) Completed Actions
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

2060. ASBESTOS, TREMOLITE, ANTHOPHYLLITE AND ACTINOLITE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 29 USC 657

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1001; 29 CFR 1926.58

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On June 20, 1986, OSHA issued revised standards governing occupational exposure to asbestos, tremolite, anthophyllite, and actinolite in general industry and in the construction industry. These standards replaced OSHA's previous asbestos standard promulgated in 1972. Since the issuance of the revised standards, OSHA received letters and petitions concerning the appropriateness of regulating nonasbestiform tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite as presenting the same health risk as asbestos. OSHA granted a temporary stay of the effective dates of the current standards as they apply to nonasbestiform varieties of tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite. This action was taken, in part, to enable the Agency to review letters and memoranda from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health as well as submissions by the R. T. Vanderbilt Company and various other trade associations concerning the appropriateness of regulating nonasbestiform tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite in the revised standards. In addition, the temporary stay was imposed to allow sufficient time for OSHA to reopen the rulemaking record and conduct supplemental proceedings on the issue of whether, and how, to regulate occupational exposure to the nonasbestiform varieties of tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite. On February 12, 1990 (55 FR 4938), OSHA published a proposal to gather additionaL information and data to determine whether and how to regulate the nonasbestiform varieties. Hearings were held May 8-14, 1990, and the comment period closed on June 28, 1990. After the close of the post-hearing comment periods, the American Thoracic Society (ATS) submitted a final report on "The Health Effects of Tremolite." The agency set an additional comment period, later extended to December 14, 1990, to enable the public to submit written comments and analyses on the issues raised in the ATS report. On September 4, 1991, OSHA extended the partial stay until February 28, 1992. On March 5, 1992 (57 FR 7877), the stay was extended until May 30, 1992. On June 8, 1992 (57 FR 24310), OSHA published its final standard which excludes nonasbestiform tremolite, anthophyllite, and actinolite from coverage under its Asbestos standard.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Notice or Partial 10/17/86 51 FR 37002
   Admin. Stay
Extension of 04/30/87 52 FR 15722
   Partial Admin.
   Stay
Extension of 07/20/88 53 FR 27345
   Partial Admin.
   Stay
NPRM 02/12/90 55 FR 4938
NPRM Comment 04/09/90 55 FR 4938
    Period End
Extension of 09/04/91 56 FR 43699
   Partial Admin.
   Stay
Final Action 05/29/92
   Effective
Final Action 06/08/92 57 FR 24310

Small Entities Affected: Businesses

Small Entities Affected: None

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA26


2061. 4,4'-METHYLENEDIANILINE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655(b); 29 USC 657

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910; 29 CFR 1925.60

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: 4,4'-Methylenedianiline (MDA) is a chemical used primarily to manufacture methylenediphenyl diisocyanate, which is used to make polyurethane foams and elastomers. Recent scientific data indicate that MDA is a carcinogen in animals and a potential carcinogen in humans. In 1983, OSHA and the Environmental Protection Agency participated in a joint effort to publish an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to solicit information on MDA production and use, estimates of environmental and occupational exposure, and studies of its toxic and carcinogenic effects. EPA evaluated the data received in response to the advance notice and concluded that the chemical presents an unreasonable risk of injury to the health of exposed workers. Under the provisions of section 9(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act, EPA referred MDA to OSHA for action. OSHA responded to the EPA referral on 2/26/86. OSHA established a mediated rulemaking advisory committee composed of interested parties from labor, industry and government to assist the agency in developing a proposed standard. The Committee completed its work in June 1987 and forwarded its recommendations to the Agency. OSHA published the Committee's recommendations on July 16, 1987, and published a proposed standard for MDA on May 12, 1989. Hearings were conducted on March 20-21, 1990. The comment period for the first set of post hearing comments closed on May 8, 1990. The second closing date was May 23, 1990. The final MDA standard was published in the Federal Register on August 10, 1992.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 09/20/83 48 FR 42836
ANPRM 11/23/83 48 FR 42836
   Comment
    Period End
Publication of 07/16/87 52 FR 26776
   Committee
   Recommenda-
   tion
NPRM 05/12/89 54 FR 20672
NPRM Comment 05/16/89
    Period End
Final Action 08/10/92 57 FR 35630
Final Action 09/09/92
   Effective

Small Entities Affected: None

Small Entities Affected: None

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Rm N3718, FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA58


2062. FORMALDEHYDE

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655 et seq

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.1048

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On December 4, 1987, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published a revised standard for occupational exposure to formaldehyde (29 CFR 1910.1048). This standard contained permissible exposure limits of 1 part weighted average (TWA) and 2 ppm as a 15-minute short-term exposure limit (STEL), along with ancillary protective provisions. Several interested parties petitioned the courts to review this standard. On June 9, 1989, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its decision, which upheld the standard, but remanded the standard back to the Agency for reconsideration of two issues: the assessment of the risk of cancer at 1 ppm, and the failure of the Agency to require medical removal protection (MRP). The final standard also required that hazard- warning labels be placed on containers of all products composed of greater than 0.1 percent formaldehyde or capable of releasing formaldehyde into the air under any normal condition of use at concentrations reaching or exceeding 0.1 ppm. The Formaldehyde Institute filed an application for administrative stay of the formaldehyde standard's cancer labeling requirement. Based on the confusion and misunderstanding of the standard's requirements reflected in the application and in numerous comments submitted to the Agency subsequent to the application, the Agency decided to stay the hazard communication provisions of the formaldehyde standard (29 CFR 1910.1048(m)(1)(i) through (m)(4)(ii). The purpose of the stay is to permit the Agency to propose to revoke these paragraphs and rely on the provisions of the hazard communication standard or develop some appropriate alternative. The stay was first granted on December 13, 1988 (53 FR 50198). On June 13, 1990 (55 FR 24070), OSHA extended the administrative stay until August 13, 1990, to consider further developments in the hazard communication rulemaking in determining what regulatory action to propose on formaldehyde. Based on public comment and the rulemaking record, OSHA published a formaldehyde proposal on July 15, 1991. The comment period ended on August 14, 1991. The final standard was published on May 27, 1992 (57 FR 22290).

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM 07/15/91 56 FR 32302
NPRM Comment 08/14/91 56 FR 32302
    Period End
Final Action 05/27/92 57 FR 22290
Final Action 06/26/92
   Effective

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Program, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N3718, FP Building, Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AA82


2063. CADMIUM

Significance: Regulatory Program

Legal Authority: 29 USC 655 et seq

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910 (Table Z-2)

Legal Deadline: None

Abstract: On June 18, 1986, the International Chemical Workers Union and the Public Citizen Health Research Group petitioned OSHA to issue an emergency temporary standard reducing the permissible exposure limit for cadmium to one microgram of cadmium per cubic meter of air. On June 25, 1987 the union and HRG filed a petition with the Court of Appeals requesting the Court to order OSHA to promulgate an ETS. In its July 1, 1987, response to the petitioners, OSHA stated that issuance of an emergency standard was not warranted, but that exposure to cadmium at levels permitted under the current standard represented a significant risk to worker health which would be addressed through section 6(b) rulemaking procedures. On September 26, 1988, OSHA published guidelines for controlling exposure to cadmium and recommended reduced exposure levels significantly below the permissible exposure limit. OSHA published a proposal on February 6, 1990 (55 FR 4052), and conducted hearings on June 5, 1990, in Washington, DC and on July 17, 1990, in Denver, CO. The comment period closed on October 18, 1990. OSHA reopened the record on September 18, 1991, to receive comments on the reports of two experiments -- solubility and carcinogenicity of cadmium sulfide. The record closed on November 4, 1991. On March 30, 1992, the court ordered OSHA to publish a final standard by the end of August 1992.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

Response to 07/01/87
   Petitioners
NPRM 02/06/90 55 FR 4052
NPRM Comment 04/27/90
    Period End
Reopening of 09/18/91 56 FR 47348
   Rulemaking
   Records
Comment Period 11/04/91 56 FR 47348
   End
Final Action 09/14/92 57 FR 42102
Final Action 12/14/92 57 FR 42102
   Effective

Small Entities Affected: Undetermined

Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Agency Contact: Charles E. Adkins, Director, Health Standards Programs, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm N3718. FP Bldg., Washington, DC 20210, 202 219-7075

RIN: 1218-AB16


Federal Registers - Table of Contents Federal Registers - Table of Contents