Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 72 / Wednesday, April 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 20185 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2015–0827. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 CoˆteVertu Road West, Dorval, Que ́bec H4S 1Y9, 

Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514– 

855–7401; email thd.crj@

aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://

www.bombardier.com. You may view this 

service information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 6, 

2015. 

John P. Piccola, Jr., 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–08463 Filed 4–14–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

29 CFR 1910, 1926 

[Docket No. OSHA–2014–0018] 

RIN 1218–AC90 

Communication Tower Safety 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Labor. 

ACTION: Request for Information (RFI). 

SUMMARY: OSHA is aware of employee 

safety risks in communication tower 

construction and maintenance activities 

and is requesting information from the 

public on these risks. This RFI requests 

information that will assist the Agency 

in determining what steps, if any, it can 

take to prevent injuries and fatalities 

during tower work. 

DATES: Comments and other information 

must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or 

received) by June 15, 2015. All 

submissions must bear a postmark or 

provide other evidence of the 

submission date. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments and 

additional materials, identified by 

Docket No. OSHA–2014–0018, using 

any of the following methods: 

Electronically: Submit comments and 

attachments electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov, which is the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the 

instructions online for making 

electronic submissions. 

Facsimile: Commenters may fax 

submissions, including attachments, 

that are no longer than 10 pages in 

length to the OSHA Docket Office at 

(202) 693–1648; OSHA does not require 

hard copies of these documents. 

Commenters must submit lengthy 

attachments that supplement these 

documents (e.g., studies, journal 

articles), by the applicable deadline, to 

the OSHA Docket Office, Technical Data 

Center, Room N–2625, U.S. Department 

of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20210. These 

attachments must clearly identify the 

commenter’s name, the date of 

submission, the title of this RFI 

(Communication Tower Safety), and the 

docket number (OSHA–2014–0018) so 

the Agency can attach them to the 

appropriate facsimile submission. 

Regular mail, express delivery, hand 

(courier) delivery, or messenger service: 

Submit a copy of comments and any 

additional material (e.g., studies, journal 

articles) to the OSHA Docket Office, 

Docket No. OSHA–2014–0018, 

Technical Data Center, Room N–2625, 

U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–2350 

(TTY number: (877) 889–5627). Note 

that security procedures may 

significantly delay the Agency’s receipt 

of comments and other written materials 

sent by regular mail. Contact the OSHA 

Docket Office for information about 

security procedures concerning delivery 

of materials by express delivery, hand 

delivery, or messenger service. The 

hours of operation for the OSHA Docket 

Office are 8:15 a.m.—4:45 p.m., E.T. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the Agency’s name (OSHA), the 

title of this RFI (Communication Tower 

Safety), and the docket number (OSHA– 

2014–0018). The Agency places all 

submissions, including any personal 

information provided, in the public 

docket without change; this information 

will be available online at http://

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the 

Agency cautions commenters about 

submitting materials that they do not 

want made available to the public or 

that contain personal information 

(either about themselves or others) such 

as Social Security numbers, birth dates, 

and medical data. 

Docket: To read or download 

submissions or other material in the 

docket, go to: http://

www.regulations.gov, or to the OSHA 

Docket Office at the address above. 

While the electronic docket at http://

www.regulations.gov lists documents in 

the docket, some information (e.g., 

copyrighted material) is not publicly 

available to read or download through 

this Web site. 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: 

Information regarding this Request for 

Information is available from the 

following sources: 

Press inquiries: Contact Frank 

Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of 

Communications, Room N–3647, U.S. 

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; 

email: meilinger.francis2@dol.gov; 

telephone: (202) 693–1999. 

General and technical information: 

Contact Erin Patterson or Jessica Douma, 

Office of Construction Standards and 

Guidance, OSHA Directorate of 

Construction, Room N–3468, U.S. 

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; 

emails: Patterson.Erin@dol.gov or 

Douma.Jessica@dol.gov; telephone: 

(202) 693–2020; fax: (202) 693–1689. 

Copies of this Federal Register 

notice: Electronic copies are available at 

http://www.regulations.gov. This 

Federal Register notice, as well as news 

releases and other relevant information, 

also are available at OSHA’s Web page 

at http://www.osha.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Exhibits Referenced in This RFI 

II. Background 

A. Introduction 

B. Hazards and Incidents 

C. Training and Certification 

D. Applicable OSHA Standards 

E. Consensus Standards and State 

Standards 

III. Request for Data, Information, and 

Comments 

IV. Authority and Signature 

I. Exhibits Referenced in This RFI 

Documents referenced by OSHA in 

this request for information, other than 

OSHA standards and Federal Register 

notices, are in Docket No. OSHA–2014– 

0018 (Communication Tower Safety). 

The docket is available at http://

www.regulations.gov, the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal. For additional 

information on submitting items to, or 

accessing items in, the docket, please 

refer to the Addresses section of this 

RFI. 

II. Background 

A. Introduction 

Communication towers are tall 

structures that carry antennas for 

wireless, cellular, radio, or broadcast 

television communications. There are 

three common types of communication 

towers: free-standing or lattice towers, 

guyed towers, and monopole towers. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20186 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 72 / Wednesday, April 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1This data includes incidents that occurred as a 

direct result of working on or with a 

communication tower. Incidents at communication 

tower worksites resulting from unrelated factors, 

such as a crane tipping over due to bad ground 

conditions, are not included. Moreover, these 

figures probably do not include all incidents that 

occurred in the relevant time period, as they are 

derived solely from OSHA investigation data. The 

IMIS database, for example, will not include 

incidents that involve individuals not covered by 

OSHA, e.g., the self-employed. The current IMIS 

database generally includes incidents only when 

they involve at least one fatality or three or more 

hospitalizations. 

Communication towers can range from 

100 to over 1000 feet tall. 

Increasingly, antennas are being 

installed on structures other than 

communication towers, e.g., on water 

towers, on electrical and telephone 

poles, and on the roofs of buildings. 

These alternative structures are often 

used in more densely populated areas 

where the construction of large 

communication towers is impractical or 

impossible, e.g., due to zoning 

restrictions. 

The construction and maintenance of 

communication towers is highly 

specialized work. This work often 

involves workers climbing the towers 

via ladders or being hoisted to 

workstations on the towers via basemounted drum hoists. To erect new 

towers, workers lift tower sections or 

structural parts using a base-mounted 

drum hoist, with or without a gin pole. 

Workers can also use cranes to raise 

tower sections. Towers are constructed 

piece by piece; workers bolt each 

section or piece into place before raising 

the next section. Non-erection 

construction activities can include 

reinforcing the structure, upgrading 

antennas, and installing new antennas 

on existing towers (referred to as 

colocation). Workers also climb towers 

to perform maintenance activities such 

as painting structural steel members, 

changing light bulbs, and 

troubleshooting malfunctioning 

equipment. During the performance of 

work activities involving 

communication towers, workers are 

exposed to a variety of serious hazards, 

including fall hazards, hazards 

associated with structural collapses, 

struck-by hazards, hazards associated 

with worker fatigue, radio frequency 

hazards, hazards associated with 

inclement weather (including extreme 

heat and cold), electrical hazards, and 

cut and laceration hazards due to the 

use of sharp, heavy tools and materials. 

Work on communication towers often 

involves complex business relationships 

among multiple companies. Many 

communication towers are owned by 

dedicated tower companies, rather than 

broadcast or cell phone companies 

(carriers). The tower companies then 

lease space on the towers to wireless 

carriers. When a carrier needs to 

undertake a large-scale installation or 

upgrade project, it will contract with a 

construction management company 

(called a ‘‘turfing vendor’’). The turfing 

vendor typically hires specialized 

subcontractors to perform specific 

elements of the project, and those 

subcontractors may further contract 

with other companies to perform some 

of the work. It is not uncommon to have 

as many as six or seven layers of 

subcontractors between the carrier and 

the company that employs the workers 

who actually perform the work (or 

certain parts of the work). This business 

structure poses challenges to setting and 

enforcing safety rules and ensuring the 

well-being of employees. 

In this RFI, OSHA is seeking 

information about the causes of the 

employee injuries and fatalities that are 

occurring among employees working on 

communication towers. The Agency is 

also seeking comments on safe work 

practices for communication tower 

activities, training and certification 

practices for communication tower 

workers, and potential approaches the 

Agency might take to address the 

hazards associated with work on 

communication towers. 

B. Hazards and Incidents 

A search of OSHA’s Integrated 

Management Information System (IMIS) 

database for both fatal and non-fatal 

incidents involving communication 

towers revealed 107 incidents from 2003 

through 2013 (Docket ID OSHA–2014– 

0018–01).1 These incidents resulted in 

91 fatalities and 17 injuries. Most of the 

fatalities (79) were due to falls. 

Structural collapses killed an additional 

eight people. Three fatalities involved 

electrocutions, and the last fatality was 

due to an employee being struck by a 

load while working on the tower. 

According to the IMIS data, falls were 

also the leading cause of injuries among 

communication tower workers, with 13 

of 17 injuries resulting from falls 

(Docket ID OSHA–2014–0018–01). 

2013 was the deadliest year for 

communication tower workers since 

2006. According to 2013 OSHA incident 

investigation reports, there were a total 

of 15 incidents resulting in 13 fatalities 

(as well as 3 injuries that required 

hospitalization). Of the 15 incidents 

identified in the 2013 reports, 11 

involved falls, and of those falls, 9 were 

fatal. Structural collapses accounted for 

two fatalities, and two fatalities were the 

result of employees being struck by 

suspended materials while working on 

a tower (Docket ID OSHA–2014–0018– 

01). 

The leadership of the Department of 

Labor, OSHA, and the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC) 

recently organized and participated in a 

workshop on communication tower 

work for industry stakeholders and 

government agencies. The event, held 

on October 14, 2014, included two 

panel discussions with representatives 

from tower climber advocacy 

organizations, the owner of a tower 

erection company, media 

representatives, carrier representatives, 

a tower owner representative, and a 

government relations liaison for a 

wireless infrastructure industry group. 

The first panel focused on the causes of 

tower climber fatalities and ways 

employers can prevent such fatalities. 

The second panel focused on industrywide solutions that can be implemented 

by carriers, tower owners, and turfing 

vendors. Chairman Thomas Wheeler of 

the FCC and Secretary of Labor Thomas 

Perez spoke at the event and called for 

the agencies and industry stakeholders 

to collaborate in an effort to identify 

best practices and steps that the 

industry can take to address the hazards 

faced by communication tower workers. 

A video recording of the event can be 

found at http://www.fcc.gov/events/

workshop-tower-climber-safety-andinjury-protection. 

C. Training and Certification 

Given the highly specialized and 

dangerous nature of the work that tower 

workers perform, employee training and 

preparation are critical. Many 

companies provide training to tower 

climbers. These training courses 

typically last two to five days and 

consist of a classroom component and a 

practical training component, with a 

final assessment of skills and 

knowledge. Topics covered during these 

courses typically include: fall protection 

procedures, climbing safety and 

planning, hazard assessments, and basic 

emergency and rescue protocols. Upon 

successful completion of these courses, 

participants receive a certification card 

from the company that provided the 

training. Although there is no standard 

threshold for certification, most 

companies that issue certification cards 

assert that their certifications meet 

standards in the National Association of 

Tower Erectors (NATE) Tower Climber 

Fall Protection Training Standard as 

well as other applicable standards from 

OSHA, the American National 

Standards Institute (ANSI) and the 

American Society of Safety Engineers 

(ASSE). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 72 / Wednesday, April 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 20187 

Recently, there have been some 

developments in employee training and 

preparation resulting from government 

and industry collaboration. The 

Department of Labor’s Employment and 

Training Administration (ETA) has 

developed a registered apprenticeship 

program for tower climbers in 

collaboration with a board of 

stakeholders. The goal of the Tower 

Industry Registered Apprenticeship 

Program (TIRAP) is to provide an 

industry-wide standard of training and 

employee development. The founding 

documents for TIRAP were signed on 

October 14, 2014. 

D. Applicable OSHA Standards 

At present, OSHA standards do not 

provide comprehensive coverage of 

communication tower construction 

activities. OSHA’s standards for fall 

protection in construction (29 CFR 

1926, subpart M), which generally 

require the use of fall protection at 

heights of six feet and greater, will 

apply in some situations, although those 

standards do not cover the erection of 

new communication towers (see 29 CFR 

1926.500(a)(2)(v)). Fall protection 

requirements for the construction of 

new communication towers can be 

found in 29 CFR 1926.105, which 

requires the use of safety nets when 

workplaces are more than 25 feet above 

the ground or water surface, or other 

surfaces where the use of ladders, 

scaffolds, catch platforms, temporary 

floors, safety lines, or safety belts is 

impractical (see 29 CFR 1926.105(a)). 

Additionally, communication tower 

construction activities are exempt from 

OSHA’s requirements for steel erection 

activities (29 CFR 1926, subpart R); 

subpart R does not cover electrical 

transmission towers, communication 

and broadcast towers, or tanks (29 CFR 

1926.750(a)). 

Maintenance work on communication 

towers is governed by OSHA’s general 

industry standards at 29 CFR part 1910. 

There are a number of general industry 

standards that apply to communication 

tower maintenance activities. Most 

specifically, the telecommunications 

standard at 29 CFR 1910.268 applies to 

the work conditions, practices, means, 

methods, operations, installations and 

processes performed at 

telecommunications field installations, 

such as communication towers (see 29 

CFR 1910.268(a)(1)). A key provision in 

the telecommunications standard is 

§ 1910.268(c), which addresses training. 

That provision requires employers to 

provide training in the various 

precautions and safe practices described 

in § 1910.268 and insure that employees 

do not engage in the activities to which 

§ 1910.268 applies until such employees 

have received proper training. The 

telecommunications standard also 

contains requirements for fall protection 

(see 29 CFR 1910.268(g)). Paragraph (g) 

of § 1910.268 generally requires 

employers to provide, and ensure the 

use of, safety belts and straps when 

work is performed at positions more 

than 4 feet above ground, on poles, and 

on towers (see 29 CFR 1910.268(g)(1)). 

When existing standards do not apply 

to a particular hazard at a 

communication tower worksite, 

employers still have a duty to protect 

employees under the General Duty 

Clause (section 5(a)(1)) of the 

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 

1970 (29 U.S.C. 654(a)(1)), which 

requires each employer to ‘‘furnish to 

each of his employees employment and 

a place of employment which are free 

from recognized hazards that are 

causing or are likely to cause death or 

serious physical harm to his 

employees.’’ OSHA has used the 

General Duty Clause in some cases 

involving accidents on communication 

towers. For example, in March of 2014 

OSHA issued a General Duty Clause 

citation in a case involving a double 

fatality caused by improper rigging on a 

communication tower. OSHA found that 

the employer was aware of, but failed to 

follow, industry standards and practices 

for safely rigging the jump line block for 

the gin pole. 

E. Consensus Standards and State 

Standards 

There are several consensus standards 

that address hazards in the erection, 

construction, and maintenance of 

communication towers. The 

Telecommunications Industry 

Association standard TIA–222–G, 

Structural Standard for Antenna 

Supporting Structures and Antennas 

(Docket ID OSHA–2014–0018–04), 

addresses the structural design elements 

associated with the fabrication of new, 

and the modification of existing, 

antenna-supporting structures. The 

TIA–1019–A standard, Standard for 

Installation, Alteration and 

Maintenance of Antenna Supporting 

Structures and Antennas (Docket ID 

OSHA–2014–0018–05), addresses the 

loading of communication towers under 

construction and the use of specialized 

equipment, including gin poles, hoists, 

and temporary guys. There is an ANSI 

standard currently under development, 

ANSI A10.48, which will address safety 

practices for the construction and 

maintenance of communication towers. 

This standard may be approved within 

the next two years. 

Two states have dedicated standards 

governing communication tower 

construction and maintenance. These 

states, North Carolina and Michigan, 

promulgated communication tower 

standards following multi-fatality 

incidents. North Carolina’s standard 

(Docket ID OSHA–2014–0018–03), 

which became effective in 2005, covers 

the construction, alteration, repair, 

operation, inspection and maintenance 

of communication towers (see 13 NCAC 

07F.0600 et seq.). It includes provisions 

for employer responsibilities, fall 

protection and fall protection systems, 

non-ionizing radiation, hoists and gin 

poles, and employee training. The 

Michigan standard (Docket ID OSHA– 

2014–0018–02), promulgated in 2009, 

governs construction, alteration, repair, 

operation, inspections, maintenance, 

and demolition activities on 

communication towers (see Michigan 

Administrative Code R 408.42901 et 

seq.). It contains provisions on fall 

protection, emergency response 

protocols, training, training 

certification, hazard identification, 

hoists, hoisting personnel, gin poles, 

catheads, and capstans. Washington 

State is planning to update its 

telecommunications standard and held 

stakeholder meetings on the subject in 

July, 2014. 

III. Request for Data, Information, and 

Comments 

OSHA is seeking information to aid it 

in evaluating the hazards that workers 

face on communication towers. The 

Agency seeks information on: the types 

of hazards that communication tower 

workers encounter; the types of 

incidents (both fatal and non-fatal) that 

occur as a result of exposure to those 

hazards; and the best methods 

employers can use to address those 

hazards. The Agency identifies specific 

issues on which it is seeking comment 

later in this section of this RFI. 

OSHA requests comments from 

wireless carriers and all parties involved 

in the contracting chain, including 

turfing vendors, engineering firms, 

tower owners, tower construction and 

maintenance companies, and field staff, 

e.g., tower technicians who perform 

work on the towers. Based on its review 

of the information provided by the 

public in response to this RFI—and 

other OSHA research activities—the 

Agency will determine what additional 

actions, if any, to take to address 

hazards associated with work on 

communication towers. Commenters 

should identify the role they play with 

respect to the performance of work on 

communication towers and be as 

detailed as possible in their comments. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

20188 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 72 / Wednesday, April 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

2While the questions under this heading are 

specific to tower climbers, OSHA strongly 

encourages tower climbers to consider and respond 

to all questions in this Request for Information. 

Also, to the extent possible, commenters 

should identify the specific question(s) 

they are addressing (e.g., by referring to 

the questions being answered using the 

numbers provided in the list below). 

Questions for Tower Climbers 2

1. As a tower climber, what are the 

most significant hazards that you 

encounter on the job? What 

circumstances or conditions create or 

contribute to these hazards? 

2. What steps do you take, at this 

time, to complete your work safely? 

What safety-related work practices do 

you think should be in place? 

3. What safety rules and work 

practices are provided to you, and who 

provides you with that information? 

4. Who assigns and oversees your 

work? Who provides your training and 

checks your equipment? When at a 

jobsite, to whom would you report a 

potential safety issue? 

5. What specific steps do you think 

employers can take to make tower work 

safer? 

6. How, and to what extent, does the 

design or configuration of towers, and 

equipment installed on towers, affect 

your ability to complete your work 

safely? 

Training and Certification 

7. Tower hands/climbers, please 

describe the training and certification 

required for your job. Employers, please 

describe the types of training and 

certification you require for your 

employees. 

8. What commercial training programs 

are currently available? What are the 

topics covered by the programs? Are the 

programs adequate to prepare 

employees to work safely on 

communication towers? 

9. Is there a need for a standardized, 

industry-wide training or certification 

program? 

10. From your perspective given your 

role in the contracting chain, what does 

a tower climber need to know to do his 

or her job safely? 

11. How do employers evaluate 

employees to ensure that they have been 

adequately trained, especially when 

employees receive their training or 

certification elsewhere? How do 

companies determine if employees are 

proficient in the topics covered by the 

training or if re-training is necessary? Do 

employers offer site-specific training 

that addresses specific types of towers 

and equipment? 

12. For employers who contract out 

work (e. g., carriers, turfing vendors), 

what contract language or oversight 

mechanisms do you use to ensure that 

work is done by trained and/or certified 

workers? 

Suitability for Work 

13. Are employees directly engaged in 

tower work assessed for physical 

fitness? If so, how? Are physical fitness 

requirements and assessments 

addressed in contracting agreements? 

14. What physical limitations should 

employers be aware of when assigning 

an employee communication tower 

work? What hazards might be associated 

with such limitations, and how could 

those hazards be mitigated? 

Hazards and Incidents 

15. Falls: Falls are currently the 

leading cause of fatalities among 

communication tower workers. OSHA 

believes that many falls result from the 

improper use of fall protection 

equipment or the failure to use any fall 

protection equipment at all. 

a. How are employers addressing fall 

hazards? 

b. Are employers providing 

appropriate fall protection equipment to 

employees? Is it maintained and 

replaced when necessary? 

c. What factors contribute to 

employees failing to use fall protection 

while climbing or working? 

d. Are there situations in which 

conventional fall protection (safety nets 

or personal fall arrest systems) is 

infeasible? What alternatives can 

employees use for fall protection in 

those situations? 

e. What are the ways in which fall 

protection systems or anchorage points 

on communication towers can fail? How 

can these failures be prevented? 

f. Should OSHA require built-in fall 

protection measures on new towers? 

Existing towers? Would such a 

requirement enhance worker safety? 

16. Structural issues: When new 

equipment is added to communication 

towers, the additional loading of the 

tower has the potential to overload or 

destabilize the structure. Older towers 

may need additional reinforcements to 

maintain their structural integrity as 

new equipment is added to them. 

Communication tower collapses have 

resulted in numerous fatalities in the 

past two years. Which contractual party 

bears responsibility for ensuring that 

any structural work on the tower—such 

as modification or demolition—is done 

safely from a structural perspective? 

What steps are employers currently 

taking to prevent collapses? 

17. Hoisting materials and personnel: 

Base-mounted drum hoists are often 

used to hoist materials and personnel to 

working heights on communication 

towers. Hazards arise if hoists that are 

not rated for lifting personnel are used 

for that purpose. OSHA is aware of 

incidents in which hoists have failed 

under such conditions. Also, 

overloading material hoists and 

improper rigging procedures can result 

in loads striking the tower structure or 

workers located on the tower. OSHA 

knows of several deaths in the past two 

years that have resulted from these 

types of incidents. 

a. When are personnel hoists used? 

b. What types of hazards are 

associated with personnel and material 

hoists? What are the best practices for 

safely managing those hazards? 

c. How are capstan hoists used in 

tower work? In what types of operations 

can they be used safely? 

d. What are the most common types 

of rigging hazards that occur on 

communication tower worksites? What 

can employers do to eliminate or 

minimize those hazards? 

e. Are there methods, other than the 

use of a hoist or a crane, that can be 

used to lift material and personnel at a 

communication tower? Which methods 

and procedures are the safest? 

f. What are the roles of different levels 

of the contracting chain in managing 

rigging and hoisting activities? 

18. Radio Frequency Hazards: Much 

research has been done on the health 

effects of overexposure to radio 

frequencies. General health effects 

reviews have found that high levels of 

exposure to radio frequencies may result 

in burns. In addition, the link between 

exposure to radio frequencies and 

cancer, reproductive diseases, and 

neurological effects has not been 

thoroughly explored. 

a. What methods are employers using 

to protect workers from overexposure to 

radio frequency? 

b. Is there a need for employers to 

institute comprehensive radio frequency 

monitoring programs on communication 

tower worksites? What would a good 

program look like? 

19. Weather: Communication tower 

workers work outside during all 

seasons, and in all climates. They can be 

exposed to heat, cold, wind, snow, and 

ice. Storm conditions can quickly arise 

when workers are at elevation, and it 

can be difficult to descend the tower 

quickly. 

a. What are the specific weatherrelated hazards to which 

communication tower workers are 

exposed? 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 72 / Wednesday, April 15, 2015 / Proposed Rules 20189 

b. How does a crew monitor and 

respond to changing weather 

conditions, including storms? 

20. Fatigue: OSHA believes that 

fatigue can affect communication tower 

workers in several ways. Climbing a 

communication tower is physically 

demanding, and OSHA is concerned 

that fatigue due to exertion can be 

hazardous for tower workers. 

Accelerated work timelines can also 

result in tower workers working very 

long hours. And OSHA understands that 

communication tower workers may 

travel long distances to reach remote 

worksites, which can result in workers 

being fatigued before they even begin 

work. 

a. What hazards are faced by a worker 

who finds it physically challenging to 

perform expected tasks, such as 

climbing a tower or performing a selfrescue? What impact can this have on 

other crew members? 

b. What are the common causes of 

worker fatigue at communication tower 

worksites? 

c. What are the effects of fatigue on 

tower worker safety, and what types of 

incidents occur as a result of worker 

fatigue? 

21. Other common hazards: 

a. What other hazards are present in 

communication tower work, and what 

types of incidents are resulting from 

those hazards? What can be done to 

protect employees from those hazards? 

b. What are some health and safety 

considerations involved in working 

with communications equipment 

installed on non-dedicated tower 

structures, such as water towers, 

buildings, silos, electrical transmission 

towers, etc.? 

Contracting and Work Oversight 

22. Describe your role in the contract 

chain and the key safety-related 

provisions typically included in your 

contracts. How do contracting parties 

oversee or enforce those provisions? 

What are the consequences if a party 

fails to fulfill those contractual 

requirements? 

23. What characteristics of past safety 

performance does your company use in 

selecting potential contractors and 

subcontractors? What safety-related 

criteria does your company use in this 

selection process? 

24. Are safety-related factors 

considered in determining whether to 

remove a contractor/subcontractor from 

an ongoing project or from future 

selection processes? If so, what specific 

factors are considered? 

25. What are the ways in which the 

multi-leveled contracting environment 

(i.e., where entities such as the carrier, 

tower owner, turfing vendor, 

subcontractor, and contractors hired by 

the subcontractor all have some role in 

the project) impacts employee safety at 

communication tower worksites? 

26. What practices might companies 

in the contracting chain adopt to 

encourage communication and 

coordination among employers at tower 

work sites? What obstacles stand in the 

way of communication and 

coordination between different parties 

in the contracting chain? 

Economic Issues 

27. The Agency seeks information on 

the number and size of firms that are 

engaged in communication tower work 

and on the number of employees 

employed by those firms. 

28. The Agency seeks information 

about wage and turnover rates for 

employees who work on 

communication towers. The Agency is 

also interested in information about the 

experience possessed by workers 

currently doing communication tower 

work. Are they usually experienced in 

this type of work? Are there many new 

or inexperienced employees working on 

communication towers? 

29. What types of equipment are used 

in tower work and how often is this 

equipment repaired and/or replaced? 

30. The Agency seeks information 

from all employers in the contracting 

chain about the extent to which 

employees directly engaged in tower 

work are covered by workers’ 

compensation and/or an employer 

liability insurance policy. 

Tower Design 

31. Can towers be designed and built 

with elevators for lifting personnel or 

materials? Can towers be built with 

booms or davits aloft to aid in hoisting 

materials? 

32. How would elevators or davits 

affect productivity/efficiency, e.g., the 

amount of time spent on the tower? 

How would elevators or davits address 

or cause any safety hazards at the site? 

For example, would elevators or davits 

address hazards related to employee 

fatigue? 

33. What are the industry standards 

for providing fall protection anchor 

points on new towers? 

Regulatory/Non-Regulatory Approaches 

34. What would be the advantages 

and disadvantages of an OSHA standard 

that covers both construction and 

maintenance activities on 

communication towers? 

35. What effects have the North 

Carolina and Michigan regulatory 

approaches had on work practices and 

climber safety in those states? 

36. Should an OSHA standard be 

limited to work performed on 

communication towers, or should it also 

cover towers used for other purposes? 

37. If OSHA does not initiate a 

dedicated rulemaking for work on 

communication towers, what other 

types of regulatory actions might be 

necessary and appropriate? 

38. What non-regulatory approaches 

could OSHA take to address hazards 

faced by employees working on 

communication towers? 

Authority and Signature 

This document was prepared under 

the direction of David Michaels, Ph.D., 

MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for 

Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. 

Department of Labor. It is issued 

pursuant to sections 3704 et seq., Public 

Law 107–217, 116 STAT. 1062 (40 

U.S.C. 3704 et seq.); sections 4, 6, and 

8, Public Law 91–596, 84 STAT. 1590 

(29 U.S.C. 653, 655, 657); 29 CFR part 

1911; and Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 

1–2012 (77 FR 3912 (Jan. 25, 2012)). 

Signed at Washington, DC, on March 27, 

2015. 

David Michaels, 

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational 

Safety and Health. 

[FR Doc. 2015–08633 Filed 4–14–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 372 

[EPA–HQ–TRI–2015–0011; FRL–9925–29– 

OEI] 

RIN 2025–AA41 

Addition of 1-Bromopropane; 

Community Right-To-Know Toxic 

Chemical Release Reporting 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to add 1- 

bromopropane to the list of toxic 

chemicals subject to reporting under 

section 313 of the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right-to-Know Act 

(EPCRA) of 1986 and section 6607 of the 

Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990. 

1-Bromopropane has been classified by 

the National Toxicology Program in 

their 13th Report on Carcinogens as 

‘‘reasonably anticipated to be a human 

carcinogen.’’ EPA believes that 1- 

bromopropane meets the EPCRA section 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS